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."

Comments

I would like to see...

[RoadkillBunny]

the SDK apparently also features an Apple logo on a side bar within the application

Does anyone have a screenshot? I would like to see what size M$ put the logo.

Re:I would like to see...

[arekusu]

On X, you can just use 'screencapture' from the commandline to grab apps which normally aren't grabbable (DVD player, for example.) Apple also had a 'glGrab' code sample which sadly has been removed. As a last resort, you can always ask for the real address of the framebuffer:
_screenBytes = (unsigned char *)CGDisplayBaseAddress(kCGDirectMainDisplay);

If it's some wacky NT derived OS though, who knows...

XBox Emulation on the Mac

[TempusMagus]

Interesting. I wonder if we'll ever see an Xbox2 emu for the Macintosh? If memory serves, wasnt the first commercial Playstation emulator for the Mac? The other good thing about this, is that the more chips business IBM gets the more incentive they have to make (more/better/faster) PPC chips - which bodes well for us Mac users. This is good news, but I'm curious if anyone knows what Intel did to piss microsoft off so much that they turn to IBM?

Well

[HappyCitizen]

I guess that answers the question of the X-Box 2's processer. I wonder why Microsoft made this move though, considering the classic WinTel alliance. It doesn't seem like a normal thing from them. Wether or not one companies top chip is faster than the other, does it really matter which one you use? It seems like by the time games start maxing out the processer, a new console has already come out. I mean look at all the other consoles. The Play Station used a relatively slow processer for the time. Same with the X-Box (733 mhz). Possibly price, but then wouldn't they go with AMD? I mean, why break compatibilty and go non x86 when x86 chips are farely cheap?

Windows on a mac

[Ianworld]

I'd say the most interesting result of this is that it appears microsoft made windows run on a mac. If their custom NT kernal is siimilar to what is on the X-box then it is quite a feat. The x-box ran a slightly modified directX which is the part of the windows OS that Wine is having a really hard time emulating. If microsoft could port that over to a G5 mac then i they could easily port a full Windows operating system over. Not that they would. It doesn't make a lot of sense for them to do it economically, but its still interesting that they could. ~Ian

burning bridges?

[timeOday]

I'm surprised they're switching both the video card AND cpu supplier for XBOX2. If this second and third marriage don't go well either they're not going to have any hardware friends left. (XBOX3... AMD and, uh, Trident?)

On a more practical note this doesn't hold out much hope for XBOX-1 game compatibility, does it?

Re:Microsoft uses a Phone-a-friend lifeline?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Yep! Anyone with an NT4.0 CD should be able to find a PPC tree, along with the Alpha, MIPS, I386 trees.

Note to Bill...

[Anonymous Coward]

Reason for Atari 5200's failure - lack of backward compatibility for Atari 2600

Reason for Sega Saturn's failure - lack of backward compatibility for Sega CD

Reason for Playstation 2's overwhelming success - presence of backward compatiblity for Playstation 1

Reason for X-Box 2's eventual failure - do I need to spell it out for you?

Well, I'm sure everyone is going to be happy to throw away their X-Box's, with its DX8 graphics, and resolution higher than most TV sets, and huge software library to buy a new X-Box 2, with its only slightly better graphics, at the same resolution without the ubergeek hacking potential.

Bill's short list of utter failures:

1990: MS-DOS 4
1995: Microsoft Bob
1999: Windows ME
2005: X-Box 2

But, hey, Microsoft is so big, that a huge failure can only mean one thing: Government Bailout!

Dual processor emulation...

[Anubis333]

Let's not forget that the speculation is that this will be a dual processor console.

The Sega Saturn was a console with multiple processors, and to this day there is no decent Saturn emulator. The hardware set-up of the Saturn made it one of the most difficult to emulate systems thus far, this has long been known/commented on/talked about.

Just because something runs on X processor, does not mean that even a computer with the same processor, or even 2-3 times the processing power can emulate it. The N64 had a 93.75MHz processor, and 3d hardware archaic by todays standards, but most PC N64 emulators list 1ghz+ processors in their requirements.

Could this be the REAL purpose of VirtualPC...

[jerkyjunkmail]

Could this be the REAL purpose of the VirtualPC aquisition? That was my first thought after reading the MS is considering basing xbox around a PPC CPU. They could have possibly decided to switch to PPC when the IBM 970 was anounced but needed to consider backward compatibility and figured buying outside technology (and maybe developers??? i don't know if the deal included transfer of VirtualPC developers/engineers) instead of rolling their own x86 emulation software would be a safer bet, give them a head start, and possibly be easier and cheaper as well.

I use a powerbook with Mac OS X. I've played with VirtualPC and it's not too bad for most things. It's definately not a substitute for a physical x86 machine for any really hairy apps like Oracle or say Pro/Engineer or heavy Photoshop usage(it's just for the sake of argument. I know, why use Windows Photoshop when there is a native mac version) Terminal Services/Remote Desktop is much better for that purpose. If the release of Xbox 2 is still a year or two off. I'm sure IBM will have ramped up the speed even more. possibly by that time a G5 would easily be able to emulate a PIII 500 or 733 or what ever lower end PIII the xbox was using thus solving the possible backward compatiblity problem

Re:Microsoft uses a Phone-a-friend lifeline?

[Endive4Ever]

I actually ran Windows NT 4.0 PPC version about a month ago. I had an RS/6000 system based on PReP (the Power PC Reference Platform) and figured 'what the hell' and installed NT on it.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, to run on NT/PPC except what comes on the Microsoft CD itself. I browsed the web, best as I could, using the IE 2.0 that everybody remembers less-than-fondly from their NT 4.0 install years back.

Then I formatted the drive, installed AIX on the box, and sold it on eBay.

PReP boxes like that RS/6000 box are extremely similar to PC's. It had built in S3-trio64 graphics, IDE and SCSI ports, PCI and ISA slots for regular expansion cards, used PS/2 keyboard and mouse, etc.

It's worth noting that Apple has moved closer and closer to the Commodity PC hardware scheme themselves. They use IDE drives now, based on the good old IBM PC-AT. They use the same memory technology as PCs. Not much in a modern Mac isn't commodity PC stuff, same chips and parts as any cloner puts on a motherboard.