Running Mac OS X Natively on Pegasos

Doesn't seem likely by Nick+of+NSTime · 2003-08-25 03:57 · Score: 1

I have no technical information to back me up, but knowing Apple, I doubt you'll get Mac OS X to work on it. Maybe I'm wrong.

Of course, Darwin is another story. It should be a piece of cake to get it going.

Re:Doesn't seem likely by Gleng · 2003-08-25 04:03 · Score: 4, Informative

Well, technical issues aside, it's forbidden in the OS X licence agreement to run the OS on non-Apple hardware. (disclaimer: not a Mac user, can't be 100% on the wording of the licence)

Whether or not it's technically possible to find a workaround to boot it without an Apple BIOS is another matter. I'm sure it will be possible though somehow ;)

--
"Proudly Posting Without Reading The Article"
Re:Doesn't seem likely by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 05:05 · Score: 4, Informative

Not only does the Apple ROM need to be in place (or a substitute for it, such as MOL) OSX also needs to have drivers for the particular chipset the pegasos uses. drivers for the audio that the pegasos uses. drivers for the type of usb, ata, firewire, parallel and floppy controllers that the pegasos uses

None of which are in OSX
Re:Doesn't seem likely by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 05:09 · Score: 1, Insightful

You would be surprised what support is in OSX.

run the following command:

strings /mach_kernel | grep THREAD_STATE

Interesting. Support for M68K, M88K, HP-PA, Sparc, PPC, i386, I860, M88110...

Just what else do you want? Apple have OSX ready for FAR more than just the PPC boxes they're shooting with now.
Re:Doesn't seem likely by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 05:33 · Score: 0

> Interesting. Support for M68K, M88K, HP-PA, Sparc, PPC,
> i386, I860, M88110...

Just so you know, those text strings have nothing to do with CPUs
Re:Doesn't seem likely by gooru · 2003-08-25 08:11 · Score: 1

knowing Apple, I doubt you'll get Mac OS X to work on it

Totally. Not only that, but I believe this is even against the license that Apple has for Mac OS X. I don't think you're legally allowed to run it on non-Apple hardward. (Someone do correct me if I'm wrong, though, as I'm too lazy to dig up my license.)
Re:Doesn't seem likely by iJosh · 2003-08-25 08:30 · Score: 2, Informative

Disregarding the Apple ROM NewWorld or OldWorld, the support can be added to OS X for the various chipsets found on a pegasos board. There is a widely used project XPostFacto which includes specifically developed kernel modules to support OldWorld hardware will allow one to install and run OS X on an OldWorld machine. So I'm sure similar methods could be used to support the chipsets on the pegasos boards.

--
Moderating to further my personal world domination agenda... and to get chicks.
Re:Doesn't seem likely by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 10:39 · Score: 0

Considering that OpenStep the core foundation of Mac OS X supported them, I wonder why you assume that they don't mean exactly what he assumed.
Re:Doesn't seem likely by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 10:44 · Score: 0

Those who wish to criticize need to read the System Overview for Mac OS X. The BootROM doesn't do anything more than POST and then boot BootX. It's presence is all that's necessary, since this is a PPC board there is one. If you want to boot Mac OS X on a Pegasos you would be wise to look at the Darwin source and write your own BootX or configure it such that it would work since that is the only thing keeping it from running on a non-Apple PPC machine.

Also the next hurdle would be getting the install CD to boot since it's BootX does check what machine your running and will probably throw up an OpenFirmware error saying your machine profile isn't recognized.

For any seasoned programmer this actually isn't too hard. Too bad anyone that attempts it will be severely smacked by Apple Legal, even worse for anyone that pulls it off. Since the License does read that it can only be install on an Apple Computer.
Re:Doesn't seem likely by Guy+Harris · 2003-08-25 16:09 · Score: 3, Informative
Interesting. Support for M68K, M88K, HP-PA, Sparc, PPC, i386, I860, M88110...
Just what else do you want? Apple have OSX ready for FAR more than just the PPC boxes they're shooting with now.

There's a difference between "there's a list of strings in the kernel that bears a startling resemblance to the list of processors that NeXT and Apple have ever ported to" and "Apple has Mac OS X ready for that list of processors".
Let's look at the list:
1. M68K - NeXT's original machines were 68030-based
2. M88K, M88110 - I think NeXT were looking at building 88k-based machines at one point
3. HP-PA - there was a PA-RISC port of NeXTStEP
4. SPARC - there was a SPARC port of NeXTStEP
5. PPC - Macs capable of running Mac OS X use PowerPC processors
6. i386 - there was an x86 port of NeXTStEP, and there's also Darwin/x86
The only surprise to me in that list is i860.
(Yes, I know, that posting, especially with the "Apple have OSX ready for FAR more than just the PPC boxes they're shooting with now." statement - right, Apple's got Mac OS X ready to run on shiny new Motorola 88K workstations - is so silly it was probably a troll, and I bit. Oh, well....)
Re:Doesn't seem likely by capmilk · 2003-08-25 20:24 · Score: 1

> The only surprise to me in that list is i860.

The NeXTdimension grapics board available for NeXT Cube systems used an i860.

You do realize ... by kalidasa · 2003-08-25 03:57 · Score: 1, Informative

That there's more to the "proprietary"/"closed" nature of the Mac platform than just the processor, right?

Re:You do realize ... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 05:08 · Score: 4, Informative

Like what, for instance? Open Firmware? Nope, that's (as the name would imply) open. The RAM? Nope, standard. The disks? Standard. Heck, even the processor itself isn't proprietary, as this silly "Pegasos" thing demonstrates.

A Mac's as open as any other computer. It's just that the parts are relatively rare. And also, of course, that you cannot legally run Mac OS X on anything other than Apple hardware. It's in the license agreement.

Silly rabbit.
Re:You do realize ... by good+soldier+svejk · 2003-08-25 09:46 · Score: 1

That there's more to the "proprietary"/"closed" nature of the Mac platform than just the processor, right?

What is proprietary/closed about PowerPC? Compared to x86?

Proprietary does not mean less common.

--
It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

-James Baldwin
Re:You do realize ... by GutBomb · 2003-08-26 06:24 · Score: 1

he didn't say PowerPC was proprietary. He said the Mac platform is. and it's true. you can't go out and buy a mac motherboard and build yourself a mac. some people might jump on that and say YES YOU CAN but that is still using apple's proprietary (meaning that you can't get them from a 3rd party company) parts salvaged from older machines, or reserved for repairs.
Re:You do realize ... by good+soldier+svejk · 2003-08-26 06:55 · Score: 1

Yes he did say the processor was proprietary, or more precisely that it was part of the '"proprietary"/"closed" nature of the Mac platform,' whatever that means.

That there's more to the "proprietary"/"closed" nature of the Mac platform than just the processor, right?

you can't go out and buy a mac motherboard and build yourself a mac. some people might jump on that and say YES YOU CAN but that is still using apple's proprietary (meaning that you can't get them from a 3rd party company) parts salvaged from older machines, or reserved for repairs.

Proprietary doesn't mean impossible to buy from third parties either. It means used, produced, or marketed under exclusive legal right of the inventor or maker, or held as a business secret. In other words, it means illegal to buy from third party vendors, or impossible to buy from them because they don't know how to make it. To my knowledge, very little of the Mac fits that bill. I think even the bridge chips are fully documented and not held proprietary. The only part thing I know to be proprietary on Apple motherboards is the boot code in OpenFirmware. You'd have to write your own replacement for that. But aren't Dell and HPq's BIOS code proprietary as well?

Apple has no compelling reason to keep the hardware proprietary because they hold the OS proprietary (well OK, large chunks are dual licensed). You can't legally use their OS without their hardware, and the OS is the big selling point. Too bad, because OS X Server and SuSe on a hardware partitioned PPC970 blade system from IBM would be pretty compelling in my data center.

--
It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

-James Baldwin
Re:You do realize ... by kalidasa · 2003-08-28 05:17 · Score: 1

What I said was that there was more to the proprietary/closed nature of the platform than just the processor. This does not mean that the processor is proprietary - though by a strict definition, it is proprietary, to the PowerPC group of IBM, Moto, and Apple, though it may be available as a COTS part - if Intel tried to set up their own PPC fab plant, they'd be sued, no? What I was saying, though, is that the PLATFORM cannot be replicated using entirely Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS) Parts, the way that the Intel platform can. As you said, you'd need to reverse engineer the boot code, and possibly also reserve engineer parts of the OS to get it to run on non-Apple hardware. For the Wintel platform, the reverse engineering work has already been done, and there are already COTS BIOSes.
Apple is a HARDWARE company. If you want the Apple experience, you need to buy a Mac. If you were able to write code to get OS X to run on a non-Apple PPC, you'd probably have hardware that you'd need to write new drivers for, etc., and would have to write that code to the same quality as the existing Apple/Apple Partners' code to get the Apple experience. An Apple computer is not a build-it-yourself job like an Intel is.
If you want the closest thing to an Apple you can get with COTS parts, you should probably try to get Darwin+OpenStep running on that PPC970 blade system. After all, you hardly need the Aqua GUI for a data center. Or you can always buy an XServe.
Re:You do realize ... by good+soldier+svejk · 2003-08-28 08:17 · Score: 1

What I said was that there was more to the proprietary/closed nature of the platform than just the processor. This does not mean that the processor is proprietary - though by a strict definition, it is proprietary, to the PowerPC group of IBM, Moto, and Apple, though it may be available as a COTS part - if Intel tried to set up their own PPC fab plant, they'd be sued, no?

The hardware implementation is partially proprietary in that it is backed by patents which IBM and Moto enforce. The same is true of P4. However the specs and ISA are published standards. If you want to build you own PPC chip you are free to, so long as it does not violate their patents. Again, this is like Intel. How this is part of the "proprietary/closed nature of the platform" I don't understand.

What I was saying, though, is that the PLATFORM cannot be replicated using entirely Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS) Parts, the way that the Intel platform can. As you said, you'd need to reverse engineer the boot code, and possibly also reserve engineer parts of the OS to get it to run on non-Apple hardware. For the Wintel platform, the reverse engineering work has already been done, and there are already COTS BIOSes.

Precisely. The Intel platform is just as proprietary as the Macintosh. The difference is that the proprietary bits have long been reverse engineered and duplicated. Off the rack availablilty is not relevant to the question of whether the platform is proprietary. That is a market question. CHRP and PREP are fully open and documented, IIRC, but you can't buy enough parts offf the rack to build CHRP and PREP boxes either.

If you want the closest thing to an Apple you can get with COTS parts, you should probably try to get Darwin+OpenStep running on that PPC970 blade system. After all, you hardly need the Aqua GUI for a data center. Or you can always buy an XServe.

Nope. That would have no benefits over GNU/Linux and significant disadvantages. There are plenty of useful proprietary bits in OS X besides the GUI. The incredibly useful command line version of Apple Software Restore springs to mind. The idea is to have a hardware partitionable blade system where we can devote whatever hardware resources we want to a specific server. With ASR we could custom image system drives in five minutes. "Need to replace a server? Give me five minutes. No I don't have to go to the server room. I can allocate the hardware and image the system from here." OS X makes a nice drop in Windows replacement for CIFS etc. The management tools learning curve would be very shallow for our existing Army of Windows admins. My sources at Apple tell me that Panther will ship with a heavily GUIfied Samba 3 implementation too. We could forego Active directory and save a bundle on CALs. Our core business happens to rely on an DBMS which is supported on OS X but not Linux PPC. And certainly not Darwin. If we want to leverage the energy and cooling benefits of PPC, we need to run OS X or find a new DB platform. Likewise, Veritas will already sell you Foundation Suite for OS X, so long as you self validate. We'd need that as we rely heavily on shared storage (Panther multipaths, BTW). They will most likely never support Darwin. There isn't even a commercially supported Darwin distro. This is an enterprise we are talking about here.

XServe? Are you kidding? For our purposes it is a toy.

--
It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

-James Baldwin
Re:You do realize ... by kalidasa · 2003-08-28 09:10 · Score: 1

The hardware implementation is partially proprietary in that it is backed by patents which IBM and Moto enforce. The same is true of P4. However the specs and ISA are published standards.

"Proprietary" and "published" are not mutually exclusive.

XServe? Are you kidding? For our purposes it is a toy.

So you should be calling up Apple and telling them you'd like to buy a more robust server with OS X. Remember, APPLE IS A HARDWARE COMPANY. They do not make OS X just to make your experience with IBM servers more pleasant. OS X is the hook to get you to buy their hardware.
Re:You do realize ... by good+soldier+svejk · 2003-08-28 09:38 · Score: 1

The hardware implementation is partially proprietary in that it is backed by patents which IBM and Moto enforce. The same is true of P4. However the specs and ISA are published standards.

"Proprietary" and "published" are not mutually exclusive.

Asolutely correct. Proprietary means either held as a trade secret or exclusive by patent or copyright enforcement. I should have been more clear and said published standards not held proprietary via patent and copyright enforcement.

XServe? Are you kidding? For our purposes it is a toy.

So you should be calling up Apple and telling them you'd like to buy a more robust server with OS X. Remember, APPLE IS A HARDWARE COMPANY. They do not make OS X just to make your experience with IBM servers more pleasant. OS X is the hook to get you to buy their hardware.

Last week I told one of their hardware Engineers face to face in front of our sales rep and our technical rep. They have a strict secrecy policy, but he felt it was safe to tell me they have no plans for a blade system, much less one optimized for availability. I told him that if that was the case they should license their OS to IBM or TeraSoft. He thought that was a great idea and recommended I tell my IBM rep. That is a problem since I don't have an IBM rep. We don't let those guys in the door.

Sad really; I was surprised at how close Panther is geting to meeting our needs. But the hardware isn't there. I suspect they will offer a more fault tolerant 2U rack system soon enough. Something to compete with HPq DL380s and the like. That would put them where we are currently in the Wintel space, except with lower cost of ownership (power aside, those CALs kill us). But that isn't compelling enough to overcome MS inertia. Being able to replace all our Intel, PA-RISC and SPARC systems with one power efficient blade system (per data center) might be.

--
It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

-James Baldwin
Re:You do realize ... by kalidasa · 2003-08-28 12:34 · Score: 1

Now THAT'S a good argument. Only problem with this format is that it often takes three or four rounds of miscommunication to get to the meat of the issue.

Apple ROM by ChiefArcher · 2003-08-25 04:06 · Score: 0, Redundant

My guess is it won't work. Apple has always put a ROM on the motherboard that tells it how to boot Mac OS's (and what versions NOT to boot).

This computer probably doesn't have the licensed Apple ROM and therefore will not boot any Mac OS without some serious hardware mods.

ChiefArcher

Re:Apple ROM by SewersOfRivendell · 2003-08-25 04:13 · Score: 5, Informative

Mac OS X doesn't rely on the toolbox ROM, though. What it probably _does_ rely on is a version of OpenFirmware compatible enough with the version implemented on Apple's motherboards.
Re:Apple ROM by wchin · 2003-08-25 05:50 · Score: 5, Informative

Wow... let's get up to date.

Apple's New World ROM based machines which have been shipping for quite some time now (think B&W G3 and the original iMac) are closer to CHRP type systems. A basic OpenFirmware ROM is what is on the motherboard. The rest of the old "Macintosh ROM" is loaded from disk for Mac OS
For more information, see: Apple Technical Note TN1167, The Mac ROM Enters a New World.

Darwin is roughly equivalent to the Mac OS X CoreOS and one would have to write a new platform support code and relevant drivers. One could copy over the parts from a Mac OS X CD after getting Darwin to work. However, to be legal, one would have to obtain a license from Apple that is different from the license that is on the current retail product. But it's not the ROM.
Re:Apple ROM by nickos · 2003-08-25 11:18 · Score: 1

Look here to see MacOS 9 running on the Pegasos - apparently OS X works fine too. AFAIK, the Pegasos does not use an Apple ROM.
Re:Apple ROM by ryanr · 2003-08-25 17:04 · Score: 2, Insightful

The file is named "molpeg.mpg", I'm guessing that implies MOL, which the poster said he didn't want.

MorphOS on Apple hardware (like iBook2) by henrik · 2003-08-25 04:08 · Score: 5, Interesting

Is it possible to run this OS on Apple hardware? There seems to be no Pegasos laptops available (yet?).

Re:MorphOS on Apple hardware (like iBook2) by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 21:26 · Score: 0

Maybe someday, not yet. It would be great though :) Both MorphOS and AmigaOS 4 might someday run on MAC-hardware too, but not yet really. - miksuh

Nice troll by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 04:20 · Score: 4, Informative

- There is no "dual" 1.6GHz G5; only a single processor model exists.

- Even if you were mistaken about dual, and it's really a single 1.6GHz G5, the 1.6GHz model does not have PCI-X. Only the 1.8GHz and dual-2.0GHz models feature PCI-X.

- "Trying to install Star Control 2"? You mean, the 11 year old game? How, exactly, are you "trying to install" it? Nice one.

- The rest of your post is laughable, especially the part where you forget you said "dual 1.6GHz" and then say "this G5 dual 2GHz"

- Nice troll, anyway

Re:Nice troll by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 04:58 · Score: 0

Not sure about the rest, but I have run SC2 on my TiBook 800 Mhz G4 running OS X quite a bit. You see, the original authors of the software managed to dig up the Amiga OS port of SC2 and have been porting it to Windows, OS X and Linux. So you see, this is actually possible. However, the install is pretty straightforward, so I don't know why they would have problems.

OpenDarwin is being ported... by AlphaOne · 2003-08-25 04:20 · Score: 4, Interesting

Since OpenDarwin is being ported to the platform, I'd be inclined to believe that just plain Darwin (MacOS X) would NOT run on the hardware as-is and therefore you can't run MacOS X on the system.

When the OpenDarwin port is complete, you *may* be able to install MacOS X on a drive then overlay OpenDarwin on top of that and then be able to boot it onto the clone.

Remember that Macs use Open Firmware to boot, so this clone would need either Open Firmware, something compliant to the spec, or hooks to make it work (or some combination of all three).

Considering the cheapest 12" PowerBooks start at around $1200, I'd say the Apple premium isn't too bad. Granted, that's WAY more than these clones, but then you don't have to deal with the fuss of trying to shim MacOS X onto a non-native platform.

--
All opinions presented here aren't mine.

Re:OpenDarwin is being ported... by zojas · 2003-08-25 05:21 · Score: 1

check the apple store, the cheapest ibook starts at $999.
you can buy refurbished ones from 3rd parties for less than that.
Re:OpenDarwin is being ported... by nocomment · 2003-08-25 08:27 · Score: 1

Maybe not "as-is" but since it runs Debian, then perhaps MOL (Mac-On-Linux) which will run OS X in a Debian evironment.

--
/* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
/* http://allyourbasearebelongto.us */
Re:OpenDarwin is being ported... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 09:41 · Score: 0

When 10.0 was current and I think 10.1 too, you could install darwin on a mac without a g3 or g4 processor, then install a drive with X installed on it and replace its kernel with the darwin kernel from your PPC install and the computer would then boot into X. I have no idea if this will work in 10.2.
Re:OpenDarwin is being ported... by downix · 2003-08-25 11:12 · Score: 4, Interesting

As I happen to work for Genesi, I might be able to best answer this question:

The Pegasos comes with Open Firmware, yes.

--
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
Re:OpenDarwin is being ported... by downix · 2003-08-26 01:57 · Score: 1

Yes, MOL works, and works quite nicely.

But I don't have Mac OSX, so I use it to run BeOS.

--
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.

Pegasos - the ultimate geek machine by nickos · 2003-08-25 04:31 · Score: 5, Informative

For those of you who don't know, the company behind Pegasos is focused on creating the ultimate "geek" machine. A number of Pegasos machines have been provided to various alternative OS developments, and it seems that the alternative OS market is a good niche that should allow this company to thrive.

from www.pegasosppc.com/operating_systems.php
"The following Operating Systems are in final stages of being ported to the Pegasos Platform and should be completed soon: AROS, Gentoo, Knoppix, NewOS, OpenBSD, QNX
The following Operating Systems are in the early stages of being ported to the Pegasos Platform: AmigaDE, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBeOS, OpenDarwin, Zynot
The following Operating Systems can be run on the Pegasos through emulation: Amiga OS 3.x, Mac OS 9, Mac OS X"

Personally speaking, as a fan of silent machines and a user of a PC that exclusively runs Linux, I am very tempted by this machine. I don't have to worry about the company going bust because by running Linux, I can easily switch hardware platforms should I need to, and I can play with Morphos and all this Mac stuff too.

Re:Pegasos - the ultimate geek machine by dbirchall · 2003-08-25 05:07 · Score: 5, Funny

Huh-huh, he said "fan of silent machines."
Re:Pegasos - the ultimate geek machine by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 05:34 · Score: 0

I seem to recall that this was Be's orignal plan. BeBox with its Geek Port anyone?
Re:Pegasos - the ultimate geek machine by justforaday · 2003-08-25 07:20 · Score: 0

For those of you who don't know, the company behind Pegasos is focused on creating the ultimate "geek" machine.

makes you wonder how the original BeBox would do in today's market, what with it's geek port and all...not to mention that it would prolly be using dual PPC 7400s or 970s...

--
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
Re:Pegasos - the ultimate geek machine by nickos · 2003-08-25 11:13 · Score: 1

Yeah, it was a shame what happenned to the BeBox - I think it was probably a mistake for Be to concentrate on the x86, although I can understand their reasoning. Nowadays, with Linux being the mainstream "geek" OS, platforms like the BeBox and the Pegasos have a much better chance of surviving, since people can buy a machine purely on the merits of the hardware (all open-source programs can be re-compiled to different traget platforms). Until an ARM (nicest processor IMHO) based desktop motherboard appears, the Pegasos is probably the way to go for the discerning geek (and lets face it, if the x86 platform had not been commoditised in the way it was (which led to its cheap price) noone would be using it - the original designers of the IBM PC wanted to use the Motorola 68k).
Re:Pegasos - the ultimate geek machine by Toraz+Chryx · 2003-08-25 13:05 · Score: 1

ARM based desktop you say?
try Iyonix complete with RiscOS
Re:Pegasos - the ultimate geek machine by dwightk · 2003-08-25 17:07 · Score: 1

how many mods would have caught that if you didn't emphasize the fan?

--
Like anyone can even know that
Re:Pegasos - the ultimate geek machine by nickos · 2003-08-25 20:14 · Score: 1

Ahh, interesting. They seem to have some problems with Linux though:

"Partial/Unsupported:
* Audio (Has stopped working in this release)
* Floppy
* Real Time Clock
* Podules

Kernel issues:
The ethernet driver needs modification to read ts MAC address from eeprom and has instead been modified to read it from its PCI memory as a temporary measure.

Because the real time clock is currently unsupported (boiler plate code only currently), it is recommenend you install the Debian "ntpdate" package if you are on a permenent connection. Otherwise, you will need to use the "date --set" command to set the time.

The USB card is not reset fully on reboot, therefore if you reboot from Linux you will need to reset the machine to regain USB functionality in RISC OS.

X Windows:
X can be made to work with some modification to the X Server using and using the frame buffer. This is very slow and the colours are wrong. We hope to soon have a working accelerated 'nv' driver for the machine."

Re:G5 Problem already - rant activated... by zpok · 2003-08-25 04:37 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Now where are the "Mod Parent Up" requests?

Or hey, what about "Mac zealots modding alert"?

There's some really really weird mindsets in the anti-mac camp.

I like reading the funnies when browsing \. but this kind of crap forces you to read with rating 3+

I'd rather they'd put their time in writing a nice mac virus and be done with it. Would give us about 6 months respite of the gay mail and no more inconvenience than installing a patch once they're done.

Coming next: Father O Day...

--
I think, therefore I am...I think.

Theoretically speaking... by rufo · 2003-08-25 05:04 · Score: 3, Interesting

...Apple's Darwin *is* open source... if you could somehow hack the Darwin kernel to recognize and boot on that hardware, then it should be able to work.

The problem is, that would probably take a serious amount of work, not to mention the possible legal snares with Apple - I don't know what the terming of the APSL is, but it may not allow such modifications. But I don't see it as being an impossible task.

--
My English teacher once told me that two positives don't make a negative. Two words for her: Yeah, right.

Re:Theoretically speaking... by Trurl's+Machine · 2003-08-25 07:45 · Score: 3, Informative

Apple's Darwin *is* open source... if you could somehow hack the Darwin kernel to recognize and boot on that hardware, then it should be able to work. The problem is, that would probably take a serious amount of work, not to mention the possible legal snares with Apple

Frankly, I don't see such possibility. APSL allows you to modify Darwin code in a manner quite similar to the GPL - you can modify all you want, provided that you will distribute the modified code with all due copyright notices and disclamiers and will clearly mark all your amendments.

The important parts of the APSL are:

You may modify Covered Code and use, reproduce, display, perform, internally distribute within Your organization, and Externally Deploy Your Modifications and Covered Code, for commercial or non-commercial purposes, provided that in each instance. You also meet all of these conditions: (...) cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that You changed the files and the date of any change (...) You must make Source Code of all Your Externally Deployed Modifications either available to those to whom You have Externally Deployed Your Modifications, or publicly available.

Please don't confuse Darwin with MacOS X. Darwin is free (as in beer and actually as in GPL) but Darwin itself is nothing but Yet Another Un*x Clone. MacOS X is proprietary and that's the one with all that eye-candy and iApps :-)
Re:Theoretically speaking... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 10:35 · Score: 0

But its all the same kernel underneath, right? I'm not sure how much of the proprietary code loads outside darwin...

And I don't think the APSL is "in the GPL", either. It is listed as a free license, though.
Re:Theoretically speaking... by Trurl's+Machine · 2003-08-25 20:48 · Score: 1

But its all the same kernel underneath, right?

Yes.

I'm not sure how much of the proprietary code loads outside darwin...

Enough. MacOS X uses proprietary graphics layer called Quartz (long descendant of the NeXT/OpenStep Display Postscript). So if you have pure Darwin with no Quartz, you can run only CLI tools. You can also run XFree and place some Aqua-like window manager on it, but no MacOS X application will run in this environment (no Photoshop, no MS Office, no Max Payne, no Starcraft ;-)). Running Linux with X11 will probably be a better choice then.

One big problem... by azav · 2003-08-25 05:10 · Score: 1

...Would be this is a g3 (can be a g4 though in a BTO) and Aqua's windowing is pretty processor intensive. If the video card is up to snuff that may offset the demands of Aqua.

--
- Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...

Re:One big problem... by questamor · 2003-08-25 06:05 · Score: 3, Interesting

I've known more than one person with a dual 400/500 G4 who's quite stunned with the performance of the iBook. Faster for many common user things. That's an 800MHz G3 compared to the Dual G4 (admittedly a lot older G4)

The G3s can still hold their own with OSX very well, as long as the surrounding architecture is up to snuff.
Re:One big problem... by jo_ham · 2003-08-25 09:38 · Score: 1

Although the Dual 450 G4 is no slouch either - we have one running Final Cut Pro 3 very happily in a production environment.

Wouldn't give up my 600Mhz iBook for love nor money though.

G5 motherboard pictures shows dual cpu connectors by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 05:14 · Score: 0

If you look at a picture like This one here of the G5s motherboards you'll see that even a single cpu motherboard of the G5 has the space for 2 CPU connectors, so it's just a matter of soldering on a G5 connector and putting in another card and there's your extra processor.

Pegasos Motherboard Cost = $500 !!! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 05:26 · Score: 5, Informative

I am not sure what the obsession with people prepared to spend an unlimited amount to avoid buying from Apple

From the UK Pegasos site [1] the bare motherboard appears to be $500 which seems somewhat high for a 600MHz G3 - adding disc/memory/peripherals + operating system this doesnt look like a very good deal given that I can by an 800MHz G4 eMac complete with OS-X for $799.

[1] http://www.pegasos-uk.com/english/products_pegasos .html

Re:Pegasos Motherboard Cost = $500 !!! by Parsec · 2003-08-25 06:04 · Score: 4, Informative

Or a used iBook from PowerMax: a white G3/500 is about about $839.

If you are a student, you can get the eMac for $749. Or checking Apple's refurbished deals there is a refurbished G3/700 iBook for $799 (non-educational price).
Re:Pegasos Motherboard Cost = $500 !!! by -stax · 2003-08-25 06:12 · Score: 1

Once it's done, and proven it CAN be done, it can be done for cheaper.
Re:Pegasos Motherboard Cost = $500 !!! by vasqzr · 2003-08-25 07:38 · Score: 1

Ever shop for BeBox's on eBay?
Re:Pegasos Motherboard Cost = $500 !!! by 4minus0 · 2003-08-25 18:29 · Score: 1

Yikes!!
That's a bunch for an iBook. I don't work for any of the following companies but I do keep an eye on the used Mac marketplace. Ebay is not a buyers market btw.
As of this writing Smalldog has an 800MHz iBook for $899.
Macofalltrades usually has good deals on portables and desktop Macs.
MacResQ has good deals occasionally(sp?).
I would certainly put PowerMax at the bottom of the list pricewise. They want $729.00 for a G4 400 desktop!!
Macofalltrades wants $500 for a better equipped G4 450
Note: direct links subject to not work as both sites update stock quite regularly.

To keep this post somewhat on-topic, I want a Pegasos. They are supposed to support up to a PowerPC G4 MPC 7450. A G4 @ 1GHz is still a lot of computer.

--
You've got an easy breezy wind at your back...most of the time.
Re:Pegasos Motherboard Cost = $500 !!! by Parsec · 2003-08-26 06:29 · Score: 1

Thanks for the links... I'll have to watch for a good deal for my home server (will be a FW iBook w/combo drive).

I suppose, if you wanted to experiment, and possibly upgrade later, the Pegasos board could be good. But if you wanted to run MacOS X inexpensively, the point of these comments is that's probably not the most cost effective way to do it. And, in fact, you could get a whole lot of mobility in comparison for a similar price.
Re:Pegasos Motherboard Cost = $500 !!! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-26 16:56 · Score: 0

This was the price for First generation pegasos no more available

PegasosII prices will be
EUR299 for G3
EUR499 for G4

(excluding VAT)

bye

Re:G5 Problem already by wirelessbuzzers · 2003-08-25 05:40 · Score: 0, Offtopic

You're right. It's not flamebait. It's a troll. If I got to metamod that, it'd go down as unfair.

He just took an old troll post and changed the machine name to G5. As a hint of this, there is no dual G5 1.6GHz; the 1.6GHz machine is single-processor and has no PCI-X. Furthermore, what the hell version of Netscape is he running? The boxes ship with MSIE and possibly Safari; there hasn't been a new version of Netscape in years, and he'd have to run it in classic.

But hey, at least it's better than Father Randy "Pudge" O'Day.

--
I hereby place the above post in the public domain.

Re:G5 Problem already by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 05:42 · Score: 0, Informative

New macs still come with NS 4.77

Re:G5 Problem already by zpok · 2003-08-25 05:44 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Just in case you *don't* know what's going on ...

The flamebait we're talking about is a complete hoax. It's sent every time an Apple topic is posted on \.

What it describes is plainly not possible, his post is full of inconsistencies.
This mail is posted in exact same form about a 100 times. Do you really think it's True then? Even if what he's trying to sell here is not possible?

the only thing he changes once in a while is the type of machine he's supposedly using. Now it's a Dual G5 1.6 Mhz.

Problem is: there is no such thing as a DUAL G5 1.6.
I repeat: not only is he describing stuff that's impossible, he's also doing it on a NON EXISTING machine.

Every time this gets posted, it's followed by a very *funny* mail from a catholic priest saying how glad he is that he's bought a mac and is now officially a member of the gay brotherhood. He's very glad he can use his mac to "convert" little boys. That very funny mail is then "answered" by a mail from Apple encouraging the priest. This is soooo very funny and colorful, especially after the 40th time.

You see? It's flamebait, lies, stupidity squared. It's not even remotely funny, given the fact that people like you are totally convinced after seeing us flame that guy for the 100th time that those mac guys/grrls are just a bunch of touchy daffodils.

Get it, got it? Good.

--
I think, therefore I am...I think.

Re:G5 motherboard pictures shows dual cpu connecto by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 05:45 · Score: 3, Funny

Sure. Piece of cake.

Where are you going to get that second processor? G5's-R-us?

Re:Father O'Day? by zpok · 2003-08-25 05:48 · Score: 1

Nope, they took away his iPod, and he consequently strangled himself with his firewire cable...

--
I think, therefore I am...I think.

Re:G5 Problem already by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 06:24 · Score: 0

This has been a version of netscape for mac os x for quite some time. Here is a link. Not saying it is good at all, just correcting you.

http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/internet_u ti lities/netscape.html

Trolleriffic! (And plagiaricious, too!) by watchful.babbler · 2003-08-25 06:35 · Score: 1

You can read the original blog post our friendly troll ripped off here. And you can find the author's more recent take on the Mac here.

--
"Freedom is kind of a hobby with me, and I have disposable income that I'll spend to find out how to get people more."

Re:G5 Problem already by mjoecups · 2003-08-25 06:56 · Score: 1

Actually I was surprised to hear it is also shipping (at least to schools) with Mozilla preinstalled...

Cool.

Omniweb should be there too IMHO.

--
If your hear it, fear it. If you see it, flee it.

Affordable? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 07:12 · Score: 0

$3/day for a year gets you an eMac with cash to spare to pay tax and get some software. This is 12.5 cents an hour. Or 37.5 cents an hour if you work an 8 hour day. As your boss for a raise, or cut back on starbucks.

Just Don't Get It by tres · 2003-08-25 07:53 · Score: 5, Insightful

It's not that I don't get that the x86 is a dinosaur architecture, and there needs to be an exit strategy, but it seems to me that the days of shade-tree computer building with expensive proprietary OS's is about over. If you are looking to support Linux on PPC, then hats off to you; Linux provides a quality software analog to the best-of-breed computer componentry out there. But trying to graft OS X onto Pegasos is the exact wrong way to go; no one wins.

Apple loses money spent on unsupported hardware. Linux loses the time that would otherwise be invested making Linux run better on PPC, and the buyer loses the support, service and integration that Apple and Linuxprovide.

I guess maybe it's that some people are somehow angry with Apple for not providing the kind of craphouse of componentry that the x86 world has been for the last seven years.

And I guess when you approach a computer as a bundle of hardware components, then all it's ever going to be is a bundle of hardware that does stuff. When you look as a computer as the amalgamation of hardware, software, support and service, then you start seeing exactly what I don't get.

Apple provides the support, service and integration on Apple hardware. Linux provides support, service and integration on supported hardware. No one provides support, service or integration with OS X on Pegasos. Even those that would try could not publicly support it for fear of legal reprisal.

As more people change their idea of what a computer is--from a bunch of hardware that does stuff, to a sum total of hardware, software support, service and their integration--need for cheap off-the-wall components will die out. Microsoft is going to be at the front of this push, making systems like the X-Box for office workers everywhere.

--
Notes From Under *nix: blas.phemo.us

Re:Just Don't Get It by zpok · 2003-08-25 08:02 · Score: 2, Insightful

I don't know, some people enjoy goofing around, installing this and that, soldering their computer to pieces, attaching freezers to dangerously overclocked processors ...

If you fall into that category, nothing you - aptly - stated applies.

And then getting OS X to run on a slow, non-babtized-build-your-own-and-run-whatever-you-l ike-as-long-as-it's-obscure machine suddenly makes sense, kind of, erm...

Know a guy who's always tinkering with everything, his macs and pc's are always in a state of undress, very erotic.

--
I think, therefore I am...I think.
Re:Just Don't Get It by reiggin · 2003-08-25 08:22 · Score: 2, Funny

Why did the man hack the computer?
Because it was there.

uh by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 08:03 · Score: 0

Try replacing the motherboard, dipwad. Better yet, try replacing the CPU.

Can't do it. They are proprietary Apple parts.

Re:uh by TotallyUseless · 2003-08-25 08:58 · Score: 1

you can replace the CPU on every Mac tower.... dipwad. The CPU are motorola/ibm parts, not Apple, and plenty of companies offer upgrades.

--

Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!
Re:uh by RevAaron · 2003-08-25 10:21 · Score: 1

Try replying to the next person next time. Usually, it wouldn't be a big dael that you weren't paying attention, but when you start calling people names, try to take a second to watch which "Reply to This" link you're clicking, it isn't all that hard.

--

Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
Re:uh by TotallyUseless · 2003-08-25 10:43 · Score: 1

the person i called a 'dipwad' was incorrect, and had called the poster of the parent comment a dipwad. I fail to see what you are talking about. I replied to the person i meant to, the person that was wrong, and the person that was the one originally handing out the 'dipwad' insults. Go to my original comment you replied to, and try clicking the 'Parent' link. What do you see? Someone with incorrect information calling an informative poster 'dipwad'.
So once again, what is it you are talking about? Maybe you are the one that needs to pay a bit better attention when replying to a post, not me.

--

Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!
Re:uh by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 10:49 · Score: 0

POOP!
Re:uh by TotallyUseless · 2003-08-25 11:39 · Score: 1

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter

--

Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!
Re:uh by Alan+Partridge · 2003-08-25 12:29 · Score: 1

can you possibly explain to us what a 'dipwad' is?

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:uh by TotallyUseless · 2003-08-25 13:07 · Score: 1

Maybe you should try asking the person who originally posted the insult. i was just replying in kind.

--

Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!
Re:uh by The+Phantom+Buffalo · 2003-08-25 13:36 · Score: 2, Informative

It is a made-up, childish word along the lines of idiot or moron.
Re:uh by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 14:53 · Score: 0

oops replied to the wrong post
Re:uh by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 14:56 · Score: 0

it is a made-up, childish word along the lines of idiot or moron.
Look for an example below, I look like one, when I replied to the wrong post
Re:uh by overunderunderdone · 2003-08-26 02:55 · Score: 1

That's ironic.

mmm troll... by tres · 2003-08-25 08:19 · Score: 1

I'll bite anyway.

Been using Linux since 1998.

Been using BSD since 1999.

Been using Mac OS X since 2001.

Now who doesn't get it?

Maybe you need to realize that the Mac stereotypes no longer hold true.

--
Notes From Under *nix: blas.phemo.us

Re:mmm troll... by Gorbag · 2003-08-26 01:41 · Score: 1

Been using UNIX since 1978.

Been using BSD since 1982.

Been using Genera since 1985.

Been using Mac OS since 1988.

Been using Solaris since 1990.

Been using Linux since 1998.

Been using Mac OS X since the public beta.

What Mac stereotypes are you referring to?

--
-- I speak only for myself
Re:mmm troll... by tres · 2003-08-26 04:34 · Score: 1

What Mac stereotypes are you referring to?

I guess I should have known better... Don't bite and the troll goes away.

My apologies, as my awkward remark regarding Mac OS sounded as if I was also propagating the stereotype of Mac OS users.

My intent was never to declare myself to be more than I am: a guy who has a history using Linux and BSD predating OS X, and continues to use them on a daily basis (you know, use the right tool for the job).

I'm trying to declare myself some kind of authority regarding UNIX in general, nor am I trying to compare my expertise against anyone else's, but rather I was openly declaring my history as an example of a Mac user who has some history with other OS's.

My big mistake was to follow the troll into the "Mac users" trap. Instead of differentiating between the Mac OS and the Mac user, I glibly followed the moron into the idea that there is some kind of typical Mac user. I should have been more careful about this distinction. I was foolish to believe that my response would illicit anything other than more childish attacks against me; it required a sincerity of the respondent.

Thanks for being a good auditor.

--
Notes From Under *nix: blas.phemo.us
Re:mmm troll... by tres · 2003-08-26 04:38 · Score: 1

I'm trying to declare myself some kind of authority regarding UNIX in general...

Heh, so much for "Preview."

That should read that I'm not trying to declare myself some kind of authority regarding UNIX in general...

--
Notes From Under *nix: blas.phemo.us

Open Firmware Needed by reiggin · 2003-08-25 08:27 · Score: 1

Without Apple's very tightly sealed and not-at-all-licensed Open Firmware, you are S.O.L. It's a nice idea but I just don't see it being possible without some serious hacks to the hardware and/or Darwin. Blood, sweat, and tears.

Re:Open Firmware Needed by TotallyUseless · 2003-08-25 09:03 · Score: 4, Interesting

"Open Firmware is processor and system independent boot firmware."
Hello, if you visit this site you might learn a little bit about Open Firmware... especially the Open part

--

Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!
Re:Open Firmware Needed by reiggin · 2003-08-25 09:14 · Score: 2, Informative

Wrong. www.openfirmware.org details much more than the site you referenced. Among those details:
"The IEEE-1275 Open Firmware standard was not reaffirmed by the OFWG and has been officially withdrawn by IEEE. Unfortunately, this means it is unavailable from the IEEE."
Also, the standards are there as "Open" but Apple's implementation is not for anyone but Apple to use. You can go to their dev site and dig all you want. You will not find Apple's OF for you to use on a Pegasus board. Just because it's Open Firmware, doesn't mean you can use it on your PPC board. All that the standard does is define a boot standard. Standards that other companies can use as well as Apple. But that doesn't mean that can reverse engineer Apple's implementation. You try it and watch Apple Legal descend on you like buzzards on roadkill.
Re:Open Firmware Needed by downix · 2003-08-25 11:16 · Score: 2, Informative

You also neglect to pay attention to other aspects of that site.

While yes, Apple's implimentation of Open Firmware is Apple's and Apple's alone, other versions of Open Firmware do exist, and following the OF spec, an OS that runs on OF runs on all flavors pretty much the same.

The Pegasos comes with it's own OF, called SmartFirmware, and it runs quite nicely.

--
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
Re:Open Firmware Needed by reiggin · 2003-08-25 12:14 · Score: 1

Ahem. Then you show us how to get OS X to run on SmartFirmware. It won't work. My whole point has been and still is that you need Apple's OF. Not Pegasos'. OS X will not run on SmartFirmware.
Re:Open Firmware Needed by Wesley+Felter · 2003-08-25 13:03 · Score: 1

OS X runs on MOL, and MOL doesn't include Apple's OF, so it must be possible.
Re:Open Firmware Needed by reiggin · 2003-08-25 13:38 · Score: 1

If it was possible, Apple would already have put limitations to keep them from doing it. Apple does not want you to put OS X on a Pegasus board. Therefore, my money is on the fact that it is not possible. I'll eat crow when someone shows one of those machines running OS X native. I'm not too good to not be willing to swallow my pride if I'm wrong. All I'm saying is my money says it's not possible. At least not without doing something "illegal" in Apple's eyes.

Re:G5 Problem already by questamor · 2003-08-25 08:54 · Score: 1

Bah! the above post wasn't a troll. My brand new eMac, barely 2 months old, came with Netscape 4.77 installed on the HD. In Classic

Why? by dhobbit · 2003-08-25 09:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

Maybe I just don't get it but why would you want to run MacOSX on the Pegasos board? Don't get me wrong I love the idea of a PPC board and I'll be getting one as soon as I get a job. But I'll be getting it to replace the piece of crap x86 board in my Linux box.

Yes, I'll admit I'm a mac user and I love my powerbook. I personally find OSX to by the greatest OS ever, with OpenBSD and Linux taking a very close second. And for me this is where the Pegasos fits perfectly, I can now run all my system on PPC. A nice PPC OpenBSD server, serving files, web, and email to my OSX laptop and my PPC Linux desktop (until I can afford my G5).

I personally can't wait for the day when I can add "x86 free" to my "Microsoft free since 1998", tag-line. A perfect world is one where I don't have to use MS and/or x86 for anything!

If you want OSX then help Apple and buy Apple hardware. If Apple can't sell hardware then they don't write software and then we're stuck with that nasty Windows UI (and just for the flame bait I'm lumping Gnome and KDE into this, since they can't seem to come up with an original UI design) And just to piss everyone off I'll even throw Apple under the bus and point out that the "New and Improved" finder under 10.3 really looks like crap.

Re:Why? by Jon+Abbott · 2003-08-25 12:15 · Score: 1

And just to piss everyone off I'll even throw Apple under the bus and point out that the "New and Improved" finder under 10.3 really looks like crap.
I have read that the Finder in 10.3 can be made to look just like the Finder in 10.2, if one desires it. The only difference is that it will be metallic instead of aqua, which should be fixable by editing the application settings with Interface Builder (included free in the Apple developer tools), or using a third-party metal UI removing utility (such as Metallifizer).

One great change to the new finder I've read about is that it is more spatial -- this should make Ars Technica's John Siracusa much happier, and our experiences with Finder better as well.

--
Slashdot's first reaction to VMware
Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 12:28 · Score: 0

nd just to piss everyone off I'll even throw Apple under the bus and point out that the "New and Improved" finder under 10.3 really looks like crap.

Meh. Get used to it. It does *work* much better.
Re:Why? by spl111 · 2003-08-25 13:19 · Score: 0

Good luck with the job search.
Re:Why? by PzyCrow · 2003-08-25 13:26 · Score: 1

What is this hype about PPC?

I know it is a RISC processor but so are every processor. Todays "x86" are just an IA32 translator around a RISC core. IA64 is the logical next step: drop IA32 and x86, use the die for real calculations and leave the scheduling to the compiler. It doesnt get more RISC than that does it?

The rest of the system has no legacy shit either as I can see. Well BIOS might be a bit stoneage.

So what is this fuss about x86 beeing bad?
Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 14:21 · Score: 0

Here's why x86 is bad.

In the same way that you'd be supporting bad software design by paying for MS Windows, you'd be supporting bad hardware design if you are paying for a Pentium 4.

Now, while I'm attacking the Pentium 4 exclusively for many of my points, it applies to most other x86 implementations after the 486 as well.

1) The P4 was designed with high clock speeds in mind. It doesn't give you better performance until it eats 100+ watts of energy at 3ghz. This is easily proven by the fact that Athlon XPs run at a slower clock speed yet get similar performance and that Pentium 3s at slower clocks were faster than the early P4s.

2) The x86 interpreter on top of the RISC core, while it's a good way to transition to different architectures, they're not using it for that. They're using it as a design philosphy just to fill the pipeline better, when switching to the core instruction set would be more efficient. Adding this interpreter as well as all the logic involved costs transistors and transistors cost energy while creating more heat.

Now you know why (more transistors and higher clock speed for the same performance) the P4/AthlonXPs have a 2-6x multiplier in power consumption compared to the PPC.

3) Like old RPC bugs in Windows, there's been old bugs in the x86/x87 architecture which have lasted this long. In the case of Windows, virii plague the net. In the case of x87 floating point, we now have two standards on how to do floating point math. (The real way which is IEEE, and the mistake which is x87) There's a bug in the rounding of floating point numbers on the x87. The jist of it is if you add 0.1 and 0.9 you get something like 0.999999 instead of 1. Now you know why there's a Math class and a StrictMath class in Java. I think this has been there from at least the 486 days, most likely earlier.

Intel can't afford to shift an entire platform (with all the non-techie users) to a better design simply because there is so much stuff that could go wrong and risk their dominance even if it means enabling them to build better performance CPUs.
Re:Why? by aliquis · 2003-08-25 16:53 · Score: 1

This isn't true, I won't type more about it right now thought since there are already information regarding this available.
Re:Why? by Durandal64 · 2003-08-26 04:43 · Score: 1

The Finder is a Carbon application, so those tricks won't work. Its main browser window is not a .nib.
Re:Why? by CableModemSniper · 2003-08-26 23:26 · Score: 1

Really? That seems I dunno, counter-productive. Look Cocoa! Objective-C! Oh, but the finder is still based of off OS9-era APIs. But what do I know. I still don't actually have one of my very own.

--
Why not fork?
Re:Why? by Durandal64 · 2003-08-28 06:30 · Score: 1

As the story goes, the big names wouldn't jump aboard the OS X bandwagon if Apple could not demonstrate that PowerPlant would be a viable development environment under OS X, since Adobe and all them develop their applications in that environment. PowerPlant can't develop in Cocoa, so Apple needed to show them that a major application in OS X could be developed in Carbon and still be usable.

Unfortunately, the test mule was the Finder, a bastardization of Carbon and Cocoa that seems to highlight the worst aspects of each one. The Panther Finder uses some .nibs for its stuff, but the main browser window is not a .nib; it is stored in the resource fork (you know, the thing that OS X was supposed to get rid of?) of a file in the Finder's package (I assume this is the case, since there is no .nib I could find for the main browser window).

My advice would be to stop over at Cocoatech and buy Path Finder. It's a Finder on steroids. Wait, I take that back. It's on a completely different level altogether. It's so far superior to the Finder that I can't conceive of any reason why anyone who considers himself a power user would ever want to use the Finder.

but how do you buy it? by spir0 · 2003-08-25 10:27 · Score: 1

I've been hearing about pegasos for ages, but I clicked on the aussie purchase link and the US purchase link and all they give are general specs. no way to buy. no release dates. no nothing.

is this vapourware? is there a release date? have I missed something?

I read someone mentioned it was going to be US$500.. that's just way too steep for a board. but if it comes down to PC mobo prices, then it's looking promising.

running OS-X on it is a lame idea because apple's machines do it so well. yes, they're expensive, but so is this. more people should go back to amiga os.

how many people here are old amiga freaks?

put your hands up :)

--
The reason girls and Windows users don't understand UNIX is because all the documentation is in Man files.

Re:but how do you buy it? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 11:08 · Score: 0

At this moment you simply can't purchase Pegasos even if you happened
to want one. This is due fact that their First Series board (Pegasos
I) has been sold out for couple months and they are currently working
on second generation board. This upcoming Pegasos 2 should be
available within a month or so and had some important upgrades. Like
On-board giga-ether, DDRAM memory and faster bus to PPC processor.

So, I hope it'll sort out well and they get those systems out in nice
timely manner. Based on adwance information prices will be lower so
it'll make interesting low-power *nix server too.

In case you wonder.. No I don't work there.. I just happen to be using
Pegasos with MorphOs right now.
Re:but how do you buy it? by downix · 2003-08-25 11:19 · Score: 1

The revision 1.0a boards are sold out. Revision 2 is slated for unveiling in a matter of weeks, with sales to resume shortly afterwards. Rev 2 upgrades the RAM to DDR, adds gigabit ethernet, and a few other nicities.

It retails for $299.

--
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
Re:but how do you buy it? by spir0 · 2003-08-25 14:37 · Score: 1

that sounds at least a little more reasonable :)

I'll have to read up on it. hopefully access to them in NZ will be good.

--
The reason girls and Windows users don't understand UNIX is because all the documentation is in Man files.
Re:but how do you buy it? by downix · 2003-08-25 15:41 · Score: 1

We are working with a potential retailer for new zealand, but if that falls through, our australian distributor has already stated that he would support any NZ customers.

--
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
Re:but how do you buy it? by aliquis · 2003-08-25 16:58 · Score: 1

It retails for $299.
Is this true? Not $499 longer? awesome in that case.
Re:but how do you buy it? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 21:36 · Score: 0

Pegasos 1 is not vapour, I did saw 4 of those in Assembly' 03 :) There were 4 normal Pegasos sytems and 1 VideoMicrowae which was Pegasos motherboard in the MicroWawe case :) Door was TFT-screen :)

Pegasos computers did run MorphOS and Amiga applications did run wery well.

Pegasos 2 is still in paper only, I think noone but maybe Genesi guys have seen any working board yet. Pegasos 2 should be released in this autumm.
Re:but how do you buy it? by splateagle · 2003-08-25 21:42 · Score: 2, Interesting

how many people here are old amiga freaks?

put your hands up :)

*puts hand up* and I wouldn't go back if you paid me: I've been using OS X (on some excellent Apple hardware) for two years now (which if you do the math, makes me a pretty die-hard Amigan: I suck with it until 2001! upgrading both the hard and software all that time) And while there are a couple of things about the 'mig that I do miss, on ballance OS X and Apple's hardware knock it firmly into the history books from an end user perspective.

Perhaps if the platform had survived its passage through the corporate alimentary tract of Commodore's disintegration, Escom's collapse and Gateway's asset stripping excercises as anything more than a forgotten brand name and some obsolete patents then it'd be worth considering as an option, but the sad truth is that it didn't.

What remains of the Amiga (with or without the Boing! ball, and leaving aside the interminable in-fighting) is such a fragmented collection of kludges and patches running on out-dated and/or cobbled together hardware that it's just no fun to use any more: it's great fun to play with, but I never got anything actually done on my old machine toward the end because I was forever having to tweak the system.

What I want from a system (and what it turns out I really loved about the Amiga) is a tightly integrated combination of well designed hard and software from a single vendor: there's only one company that offers that these days and it aint based in Snoqualmie.
Re:but how do you buy it? by downix · 2003-08-26 01:54 · Score: 1

To be specific, it's 299 euro, which brings it to just over $300. No, not $499 anymore.

--
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.

It's the graphics card, dude by Knife_Edge · 2003-08-25 11:08 · Score: 2, Informative

Not the cpu in this case. A newer iBook will certainly have a Quartz Extreme compatible gpu, while the older G4 macs may not. Quartz Extreme support makes the difference in feel between the systems - it really is a big speed boost for drawing stuff on the screen. Check the model and amount of memory in the graphics cards before you assume the performance difference is due to the cpu.

What is MorphOS? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 12:10 · Score: 0

Does anyone know for real what OS is this MorphOS? Call me ignorant if you may, but it's the first time I ever hear about it! Is this another UNIX based OS, a new Linux distro hidding its origins, or something of its own (not related to UNIX in any way, like Mac OS 9 and Windo$$$)? I went looking around the site but didn't find that much information. So, what gives?

Re:What is MorphOS? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 12:41 · Score: 0

It's basically AmigaOS ported to pure PPC code. At the moment amigaOS is mostly 68k with some PPC stuff in it. AmigaOS 4.0 should solve that, but it's been 4 years in the making and still not released.

MorphOS is an Amiga clone, which works like one, looks like one, smells like one, and runs Amiga software
Re:What is MorphOS? by aliquis · 2003-08-25 17:02 · Score: 1

MorphOS isn't unix based and currently contains an "abox" which let you run the system friendly old amiga os programs. Read up on morphos website.
Re:What is MorphOS? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 21:43 · Score: 0

MorphOS is a AmigaOS clone. It's unofficial AmigaOS compatible OS for the PPC. There is also official AmigaOS 4 PPC in development.

So MorphOS is PPC native Amiga compatible operating system. You can run old m68k and PPC Amiga software under it. MorphOS is wery compatible with Amiga applications, there is m68k JIT emulation and support for the older Amiga PPC-API's. Only problem is that you can't run softwre which requires Amigas custom chipset. That's not any big problem because almost all newer Amiga software can use gfx-cards etc. But there is UAER for MOS, you can use that if you want to run old AGA games etc. Ofcource there already is MorphOS native applications and games too. MorphOS and AmigaOS applications run side by side.

So in short, MorphOS is Amiga compatible PPC native operating system.
Re:What is MorphOS? by Soroths · 2003-08-26 12:14 · Score: 1

Hey guys, thanks to both for your replies clarifying what MorphOS is. I've certainly heard before about the Amiga platform and its OS, but if truth be told I don't know much about it either. I was just curious about what could have seemed as an entirely *new* OS because as far as I know through out the computing era the number of *pure* (because of a lack of a better word) OSs has been relatively low. Lets see, how many do we have? Classic Mac OS from version 1 up to 9, DOS and derivatives (up to Windows ME), Windows NT and derivatives (including XP and 2003 Server), OS/2 (closely related to NT but usually considered a separeted brew), VMS and succesors, NetWare (could that be considered an OS on its own, or has it always been based on DOS?), Amiga and last but *most* certainly not least, UNIX and all its derivatives (namely Linux, all the BSDs --including Darwin-- Solaris, Minix, HP-UX, AIX, Unicos and so on, and so on, and so on...). How many does that count give us? 8, or maybe even 6 if NetWare is packed inside the DOS variants and and OS/2 is packed inside the NT variants. A relatively low number indeed, and if you consider that some of them are fading away and disappearing... it seemed all that much more interesting to see a complely new player in this ball park. Personally I think that in the end we'll only have NT based systems (like Windows XP, Longhorn, 2003 Server and others to come) and UNIX descendants, what do you think? Classic Mac OS will disappear, so will DOS based systems because of Microsoft's push towards NT based ones, VMS is practically gone, IBM anounced some months ago the end of the OS/2 project, and NetWare seems to be loosing market share at incredible speeds (but I'm not too aware of the life that it still has inside). That leaves us only with three: Amiga (of which I know practically nothing; is it fading away as well?), NT and UNIX. If Amiga says good bye then we'll only have the two with which I sarted my argument. I don't know, that's how I see it; what do you guys make of it? Anyhow, thanks again for the clarifications...

What is MorphOS? by Soroths · 2003-08-25 14:10 · Score: 1

Does anyone know for real what type of OS this is? Is it just another UNIX based OS (with Kernel, shell, accounts and all the repertoire) or something completely of its own like classic Mac OS (pre X) and Window$$? Call me ignorant if you may but it's the first time I've ever heard of it and I went through the web site but couldn't find much information. So, what gives?

The Pegasos2 by aliquis · 2003-08-25 16:43 · Score: 1

Althought the specs isn't completely out yet it's supposed to future a Marvell Discovery II chipset, 3 gigabit ethernet ports, PCI-X among others and a G4 in the 1-1.4GHz range for only $499 which I think is very affordable, even compared to x86 machines. The machine was supposed to get released under September and so far I haven't heard any other dates. Hopefully Genesi releases the final specs very soon.

not completely true by aliquis · 2003-08-25 16:49 · Score: 2, Informative

Well, this is partly true. The Pegasos price was $499, but less than 1000 was produced, and in the end you could get one (motherboard and cpu) for $299 if you signed up phoenix.

The old pegasos computer isn't produced longer and probably out of stock everythere. But the pegasos2 is supposed to get released during september and will future a much better price/performance ratio since it will be sold for the same price ($499) but are very likely to have three gigabit ethernet ports, PCI-X, 1-1.4GHz G4 and so on. G4 card for the old pegasos costs $200, aswell as to replace your pegasos with a pegasos2, which is a very nice price since you can/could get the pegasos for 299, pay 200 later and then have a pegasos 2.

HEY! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 17:13 · Score: 0

This is a great idea! Cheap OSX? sw33t!

you people don't need an 'exit strategy from X86'--you should know it'll be handled transparently from most of YOUR perspective by most of THEM. follow? okay, what you really need is PDF-based X that can speak quartz. so everyone touch your peepee and make a wish, because that will land you more pay pal clicks than your w32 binary ever seen.

OpenDarwin could do it... by MatzeLoCal · 2003-08-25 20:51 · Score: 1

Some ppl managed it to build an OpenDarwin-Kernel that allows OS X to run on non-G3/G4/G5 macs. So there is a good chance to make it possible to run on Pegasos

Re:OpenDarwin could do it... by anarkhos · 2003-08-26 10:47 · Score: 1

Is that based on the 10.2.6 kernel or some ancient 10.1 kernel?

To my knowledge 10.2 kernels don't work on Macs with pre-G3 processors.

--
>80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent
>life
Re:OpenDarwin could do it... by MatzeLoCal · 2003-08-26 17:30 · Score: 1

As far as I know the first build was based on 10.1, maybe there are new builds.. I'll let you know when I know more.

Peace,

LoCal
Re:OpenDarwin could do it... by anarkhos · 2003-08-26 17:34 · Score: 1

I highly doubt the 10.2 kernel will run.

BTW this isn't something special OpenDarwin does. Apple's standard 10.1 kernel works on Macs without G3 processors, no thanks at all to OpenDarwin.

--
>80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent
>life
Re:OpenDarwin could do it... by MatzeLoCal · 2003-08-26 23:20 · Score: 1

Check here: http://eshop.macsales.com/OSXCenter/XPostFacto/ it seem that it also works with 10.2.6 :) Got that link thru the spymac.forum I found also this: http://manila.mems.rice.edu/behr/stories/storyRead er$90 And I'm sure that there is a "relative" easy way to get it run on a Pegasos. Pacem, LoCal
Re:OpenDarwin could do it... by anarkhos · 2003-08-29 07:59 · Score: 1

Duh.

But not with the original processor. 10.1 worked with the original processor, with 10.2 you have to upgrade to a G3/G4

--
>80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent
>life

translation by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 21:20 · Score: 0

Was too stupid to use Windows.

Switched to Linux.

Was too stupid to use Linux.

Switched to BSD.

Was too stupid to use BSD.

Switched to MacOS X. ...

Re:translation by tres · 2003-08-26 03:06 · Score: 1

Was too stupid to use Windows.
Switched to Linux.

Yep, you used to see that happening all the time, didn't you... Them were the heady days, weren't they; people were switching in droves from Windows to Linux in 1998 because it was easier.
Translation:
Was too stupid to make a decent troll.
Switched to Anonymous Coward.
Come on, if you're going to waste my time with trolls, at least use that crap between your ears and think of one that actually has some merit as a troll.

--
Notes From Under *nix: blas.phemo.us

But why? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-08-25 23:46 · Score: 0

Mac hardware is cheaper and more powerful anyway. A version of Linux is available for the Pegasos, so MOL is possible, (but thats only really of use to those who have already bought a Pegasos board to run MorpOS or LinuxPPC). OSX is more than a kernal and a pretty GUI. The amount of work to get Mac OSX running on this board would be phenominal. It's also funny that the MorphOS developers have been considering dropping the Pegasos in favor of Apple H/W eventually.

probably no by sootman · 2003-08-26 02:44 · Score: 1

It was impossible to run Mac OS on BeBoxes which used the same Motorola 60X's as Macs at the time. AFAIK, Mac OS absolutely *will not run* unless Apple blesses the BIOS or something similar. In other words, it won't ever run on a montherboard that doesn't come from them. PPC != Apple.

--
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.

Re:G5 motherboard pictures shows dual cpu connecto by Durandal64 · 2003-08-26 04:29 · Score: 1

IBM. :)

If you can get Darwin to run.... by putaro · 2003-08-26 17:55 · Score: 2, Insightful

If you can get Darwin up and running, Mac OS X will run. I've replaced the OS X kernel with a kernel compiled from the Darwin sources (on a Mac, mind you) and it all works just fine. The trick will getting all of the drivers to work properly. Objective-C, anyone?

There's no magic Mac ROMs anymore. That's been dead for so long it's ridiculous. I used to work on the OS team at Apple - I _know_.

MacOS X on non-supported hardware by TrueJim · 2003-08-28 04:52 · Score: 1

Over the past few years I've taken several old legacy Macs (PowerPC 5600-9600) and installed Sonnet CPU upgrades on them, then installed (or attempted to install) OS X. I'm not an expert on the OS X boot process, but it appears to me that one of the first things OS X does is check to make sure it's being booted on an officially supported platform. If it believes it's not on such a platform, it presents a screen that shows a circle with a "bar dexter" slash through it. I guess the idea is that OS X is checking to make sure that a G4 hard drive hasn't been taken out and stuck in an older PowerPC. SonnetTech.com has some tools that "trick" the OS into installing even on non-supported platforms, but my success with those tools has been mixed. For example, it doesn't appear to be working on the PowerMac 9600 that I was playing with this this last weekend.

--
I hope that after I die the one word people use to describe me is "resurrected."

Re:G5 Problem already by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-02 06:57 · Score: 0

OmniWeb? Bah. Maybe when 7.0 comes out.

Slashdot Mirror

Running Mac OS X Natively on Pegasos

151 comments