Slashdot Mirror
Xbox 2 SDK Released On Mac G5?
Espectr0 writes "The Inquirer reports rumors, courtesy anonymous sources, that Microsoft has released the Xbox 2 SDK to select videogame developers, and they are using 'dual Apple Power Mac G5 systems running a custom Windows NT Kernel.' This ties up with earlier rumors which mention that the XBox 2 will be powered by the IBM chip, and ATI will be providing the video chip." The report also notes: "Interestingly, the SDK apparently also features an Apple logo on a side bar within the application."
I think the use of the Apple G5 systems with a funny NT kernel running indicate that the XBox2 is going to have a lot more in common with the Apple G5 than the common PC. Afterall, there just aren't a lot of PC motherboards in circulation built for the IBM PowerPC chips.
Clearly, the final specs for the XBox2 aren't set in stone. So, since they can't deliver any XBox2 motherboards because they're not exactly fully designed yet, Apple's a reasonable place to turn for successful implementation of the IBM processor chips. It's likely that the Apple logo within the software was part of the price Microsoft had to pay for Apple's assitance in supplying a little help in writing that NT-on-PowerPC kernel...
Why would it mean anything. It seems its just a development environment for the Xbox, and considering that it seems the Xbox 2 will have no backwards compatibility why would this environment help in porting, when they have turned their back on intel architecture for the platform. Just because it has a NT kernel doesn't mean anything, remember NT ran on PPC as well as Alpha and Intel when NT was actually called NT.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
I'm really not surprised. I mean, Apple has no stake in the videogame market, so why not help out someone (even Microsoft) and get a little bit of extra money? Microsoft would find a way to do it eventually, so its not like if Apple didn't help it would be any sort of blow against MS.
I think we should wait for an official release from any of the companies involved.
Until then the SDK is just Vaporware.
I think I think, therefore I think I am.
I would say probably nothing - comparing running XBox SDK on G5's to porting windows apps to OSX is an apples to oranges kind of deal. If you're talking linux x86... shouldn't be too hard to port to OSX anyway.
[Z?]
This may be why all those new G5s where being rolled into the microsoft offices some months ago. The guy who took photo's of it and posted it on his web site got fired for taking the photo's because of what microsoft management called "security concerns". I can't seem to find the original story.
Holy Jesus, you people are misinformed.
August 6, 1997- Microsoft agreed to purchase $150 million in non-voting Apple preferred stock. Note that it was NON-VOTING stock-- so essentially this was just a goodwill investment in Apple. Microsoft was required to hold the stock for at least 3 years before selling. Another clause of this investment was that Microsoft was to continue to produce Macintosh products, including all new versions of the Microsoft Office product, for a period of five years. In exchange, Apple would make Internet Explorer the default web browser on Macs, and not sue the living hell out of Microsoft.* Microsoft has since sold all of this stock, at a nice profit, I might add. This agreement expired in August 2002, and since then MS has occasionally made noise about discontinuing Mac Office. Apple is also no longer bound to the terms of this agreement, so expect to see IE vanish from new Macs as soon as Apple's Safari browser goes 1.0.
* Strong rumors from several sources indicate that the 1997 deal was the public portion of a settlement made after Apple discovered substantial patent and/or copyright infringment by MS in Windows. Word is that there was a meeting between senior Apple and MS officials where Apple laid out the evidence and an ultimatum. Personally, I think there is some credibility to this, as Microsoft rarely if ever does anything that could be deemed 'nice,' especially to a competitor. There is, however, another school of thought that says Microsoft was only acting in their own self-interest, propping up Apple so they would have a competitor to point to when the antitrust thing really built up some steam. I question the use of the term 'propping up,' as Apple had a few billion in the bank at the time and did not need the $150M, and the government would have realized that.
Since it's not going to be out for another 18 months, Microsoft's counting on a Moore's Law-compliant doubling of all of the technologies involved at the same price point they're at now...
Besides, everything gets cheaper when you buy it in bulk...
I'd guess they made the choice for heat production reasons. The XBox is quite large for a game console and it still has heat problems. Using a smaller, cooler chip would help make this more of a real console. Intel is still having problems with its Prescott processor and is also currently trying to reposition itself with respect to the 64-bit transition. AMD doesn't have a low-heat CPU available either, though they're otherwise better positioned in the marketplace.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out, though. Getting Windows to run on a new architecture will likely take more than a new kernel.
You forget that MS now owns VPC, which makes running X86 stuff (Xbox) pn Power5 somewhat easier than before. So, backward compatability through an emulation layer isn't out of the question.
There are 1.1... kinds of people.
Consoles are a cutthroat market. The margins on hardware aren't razor thin, they are actually negative at least in the beginning and almost non existant after that. Also, it matters to be the biggest baddest, best looking, etc. So it is to the advantage of console makers to go with whoever will give them the cheapest stuff with the best performance.
I would bet that IBM is probably going to sell the 970s for X-box 2s at close to cost. For them it's not a money making move, it's a publicity move. As of late IBM's chip division has kind been seen only as a high-end server/supercomputer thing. Thier midrange market is almost non existant and their embedded market has been shrinking. Well the 970 is a serious midrange contender and I'm sure they want people to know it. Being the chip in one of the big 3 consoles certianly goes a long way for that.
This news is especially interesting in light of the conspiracy theories around the Xbox. Basically the idea is that the Xbox is a testbed/honeypot for palladium.
.NET gaining ground, Windows apps will become cross-platform easily. It makes sense that MS would want its APIs to dominate on all hardware platforms. They don't really need an alliance with Intel anymore.
What if instead of choosing PPC for the Xbox2 and porting Windows, they first chose to port Windows. Perhaps Xbox2 is a testbed for Windows-on-PPC, subsidizing the cost for writing the port through console licensing and mitigating the risk that PPC won't achieve wide adoption. The payoff is being able to continue to market Windows as a standard platform for both the desktop and server if PPC gains wider adoption.
With
For great justice.
Also, don't forget this is from The Inquirer. Definitely not the most credible news source in the world.
They could easily port Windows NT (by that I mean the line including 2k, XP and 2003 server) to a Mac if they wanted. Windows NT was made to be portable from the start, as are most micro-kernel type OSes. NT 4 was actually available for x86, Alpha (Digital's 64-bit processor), PPC (IBM systems, not Macs) and MIPS. They moved to only x86 since sales weren't worth it on the other platforms.
The reason you don't see it for Macs is monetary and licensing. Apple wouldn't be happy with them if they tried (might even wind up in court) and there'd be no economic incentive since a large majority of Mac users use Mac to NOT use Windows. Also, software would still have to be recompiled for the new processor. So it's not like there would be a huge library of apps out there.
That was the problem with NT on the Alpha. It was NT in every way, and all the included software worked great and very fast. However, there was very little effort on the part of software companies to release Alpha versions of their apps. There was an emulator out there that allowed x86 apps to execute on Alpha, but as with all emulators it was slow. Given that speed was the allure of the Alpha, most people elected to use the cheaper x86 if NT was what they needed.
Ok, folks, this has nothing to do with apple as it is an ibm chip.
You wouldn't pay much more than $300 for a videogame system, but... how much would you pay for a box that:
- plays next generation videogames
- plays DVDs (HD-DVD maybe?)
- acts as a PVR
- plays MP3/WMA music, with a nice on-screen browser
- acts as a server or client to distribute media
to all the TVs/stereos in your house (they are already doing this with XBOX and Windows MCE)
This is the goal of the XBox2. It is not just another videogame system. It is Microsoft's next attempt at becoming a real player in the consumer electronics market.
Yeah, because that Xbox1 emulator scene on the PC is just booming... ;-)
Not the least either. Their sources have been improving, and afaik they were the first to report on Yamhill ~2 years ago.
Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams