Slashdot Mirror
Next G5 Multitasks Operating Systems
squiggleslash writes "IBM has big plans for the 970, Apple's so-called "G5". The CPU will support partitioning, similar to IBM's mainframe systems, allowing multiple operating systems to run at the same time on a single CPU. A Mac built around this chip could theoretically run OS X, GNU/Linux, Mac OS 9, and the PowerPC version of Windows NT, all simultaneously and independently."
But it sounded really interesting.
On a more serious note, I doubt it could run the PPC WindowsNT as it would be lacking a few important drivers, but running OS X and Linux side by side would make a very interesting system. It would be nice to see som Xserves in our datacenter here.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
>A Mac built around this chip could theoretically run OS X, GNU/Linux, Mac OS 9, and the PowerPC version of Windows NT, all simultaneously and independently."
But in reality, i believe this is so apple can release "big iron" type systems (servers), the VM would allow Multiple versions of the server OS to run for maximum uptime, protection etc...
Most people are going to take it as "Cool i can run windows and OSX at the same time at full speed" But in reality its closer to what i described above.
But if others care to chime in i could be completely wrong...
A Mac built around this chip could theoretically run OS X, GNU/Linux, Mac OS 9, and ...
The G5 cannot natively boot Mac OS 9. However, you can run most OS 9 software through the Classic Environment in Mac OS X.
If we count the Classic Environment, though, why stop at that list? You could run virtually any OS, through various emulators. Windows 95, DOS, BeOS, etc...
Wow... My head just exploded. Thanks. I wonder if you could run a stable kernel and debug a new kernel at the same time. THAT would be great.
OS X is already the best OS available anyway.
I know this is just a troll, but people need to rethink their notion of the term "best".
In my IT department, we're abandoning the search for systems that are "the best." Now we look for "very high quality" systems instead. It may seem like mincing words to some of you, but it makes a real difference. Territorial bastards will always be teritorial bastards, but it's amazing how much better their decisions are when you say, "is the solution very high quality" instead of "is it the best." They're forced to make an actual evaluation instead of just going with their gut or their pet. They'll still try to spin their favorite solution, but they're at least forced to acknowledge the real strengths of the competition.
TW
"The new IBM is much more focused on giving enterprise customers What They Want. And What They Want is a commodity OS (Linux/Windows) on commodity hardware (x86). They want CHEAP, and IBM will give it to them."
While it's true they want cheap, I don't think many people are married to x86 for things like databases. Those can usually be anything. And when it comes out, the POWER5 will have the lead in database performance by a factor of 3. With numbers like that, nobody cares what the CPU is or what the OS is.
I doubt IBM will require that clients be any platform in particular, but there are advantages to having binary compatability between the servers and the clients. Or perhaps more importantly, binary compatability between giant mainframes and smaller servers.
In any case, the more alternatives there are, the better. And if such a partnership exists, I'm sure they'll eventually be able to convince Apple to sell desktops with ECC memory so they can actually have a proper workstation.
I rarely criticize things I don't care about.