OSX 86 Questions ANSWERED!

First, let me start by saying we will not assist pirating, or copyright infringing OSX 86. This is just some research to get some info about the system, and some updates and changes will be periodically made and maintainted by me.

First, I'm going to start with the much discussed "TCPM" chip. TCPM stands for Trusted Computing Platform Module. The TCPM chip is a 2048 bit chip that basically registers with the OS that it's there to keep it from running on unauthorized hardware, as Apple has sworn it will not allow to happen. There are already several hacks to get pirated copies of the developer install DVD working. Some of which sacrafice the operating system's capability. However, Apple Computer says these will not work on the final release, as they plan to further strengthen the quality of the security system. At a first glance, when attempted by developers whom have recieved the kit, a simple "Darwin x86 is not compatable with this hardware configuration." message shows up. However, booting into verbose mode shows messages that it is actually probing for a device. The way it seems is that if Apple stops the majority from putting it on beige boxes, they'll be fine. As long as it's just that select few doing that, it will not hurt them too badly.

Hardware in the developer kit. I do not have all the hardware configuration, but from what I understand, the developer kit hardware is a 3.6 GHz Pentium 4 prescott (with SSE3, importance discussed later). There are also Intel Extreme Graphics 900. That's all I know. It is however presumed that they're using integrated sound and eithernet at this time.

Some notes about differences in OS functionality. Developers are impressed with the speed. The OS is said to completely load in just 10 seconds on a developer machine. There have been reports of "missing artwork" Where question marks, and blank spots occasionally appear where an image should be. Safari is supposedly more efficient at "snapping up webpages onscreen" Than on a powerpc. Many developers report better speeds than on their G5s, some disagree. Quartz Extreme is completely functional on this and some other popular intel and non intel chipsets. ALMOST ALL graphics cards aren't supported. To detect hardware, they are using a generic detection engine, as it detects hardware, such as different graphics cards (W/O QE). The iTunes binary in OSX86 is still PowerPC based, so rosetta is required to run iTunes.

Rosetta. Rosetta is the groundbreaking item integrated to translate PPC binaries for OSX86 at speeds from 30%-80% in real time. All video and audio are fully functional. Rosetta requires the SSE3 CPU extention to run properly. There are a select few applications that will not run under roestta, but it is still under improvement.

-To be continued later-

Build 10.4.3 is now out to developers.
Some improvements are:
Quicktime 7.0.4
iTunes 6 (unibin around)
Updates to Safari, mail etc
Rosetta supports G4, G5 apps using AltiVec (Velocity engine)
Kernel panics occur less
Speed improvements
Xcode 2.2


The security in this OS was broken in less than two weeks. If apple plans to keep up their security, they'd better improve it now, as 10.4.4 is expected to be the release of the Intel macs Next month at MacWorld. Yes, they're ahead of schedule. I will be purchasing one

anyone else interested in buy and intel Ibook when they come out? I may, but so far there is no advantage but speed, maybe if you can dual boot it or something I may.

not rlly, i tried a developer kit, and its pretty speedy - much better than g5 / g4, however i noticed that macs were pretty speedy in well written applications - the g5 isnt slow, it just has to have applications written well.

Saying that, just moving around the screen is more responsive. Its like adding ram to windows. I think that an x86 mac is excellent - i just wish you could install to non apple hardware, that the only way they are going to get a bigger % share. If i had to buy one, id by pc, cos its better priced.

The Intel version of the O.S. redwaws much faster, making a better GUI. All in all, intel wise, the O.S. is better than PowerPC, as all the flaws such as buffer underruns have been taken care of, as the latest update 10.4.3 build 8f1111 has NX/XD support. The Intel applications on the DTK are faster than the powerpc versions on a Powermac G5. When more universal binaries come out, the intel platform will be excellent. Or just plain intel binaries. But as long as rosetta is still being used, the O.S. will still feel and perform week. Rosetta uses a large chunk of CPU power for a single app, this makes the O.S. slower, and multitasking worse. I'm not going to get into the Windows vs Mac debate right now, but I still feel the Windows GUI is better and faster making for more productivity, and the O.S. and NT kernel as a whole is faster than the mach_kernel. However, this is still the beta version, of course talking about the x86 version. This might also be that the GUI seems less productive. Some notable improvements over the powerpc version are:
Startup times much faster
Web Rendering Faster (Safari)
More advanced SMID instructions, giving applications more potential SSE2/SSE3>Altivec
More general processing power, from nutural tests, the x86 outperforms powerpc.
Allows for a wider selection of 3rd party hardware extentions. If I get a powermac, and it's no longer great in GPU power, and I want to upgrade, I don't have to get an expensive mac version, which is the same with a 128k EEPROM, I can get any standard PC one, as long as it's the same slot, with a 64k EEPROM.

I think the Intel switch is the right move all in all, but, another change from Apple. People have to get tired of Apple's transitions sometime. With these transitions and all, expensive and stuff, I will stick with my more stable, more reliable, more selective of software Windows for now.

Yeah, x86 or not, I'm still not gonna touch a Mac OS.


If I want a stabile, powerful system, based on *NIX, I'll use Linux.

If I want to game, I'll use Windows.


What does that leave for Apple? Nothing, absolutely nothing, especially if they want to stop other OSes from running on their hardware and want to overcharge for it and make upgrading difficult, etc. etc etc.

i think mac are for people who dont game, or dont want to run linux, because theyr nub's - i think mac's are excellent for people who web browse, have an ipod, and just do word processing...

Hmmm...

I guess I can see that. I'm still hoping some Linux distros reach a point where the install is extremely painless - maybe even a largely automated install, that sets up a Windows- or OS X- like environment, while asking little of the user in the beginning. Noobs can use Linux fine if they just want to web browse, do word processing, etc. I'd imagine there are ways to sync up an iPod as well.

It's just getting it to the market. How do noobs get a computer? But it prebuilt. Which means there's already an OEM-installed OS, and that gives them little incentive to switch. Linspire was an interesting idea, but never really got enough attention to it, and I've heard it had some shortcomings. With what many people do with computers, I can see having Linux preinstalled on an OEM machine, if they can get a good ad campaign that highlights the strongpoints. As long as the company has a decent update service, and provides availablity for other programs if the suer wants, it would be great for many users.






Something I didn't mention above - Cedega. As that matures, hopefully I'll ween myself off Windows. I dont game much, but that may change when I get my own box and a better graphics card, and I'd like to be able to do so from Linux. Actually, it'll be pretty exciting as the Cedega code slowly works its way into Wine, as IIRC I've read it will.

i highly doubt it, linux is getting alot better, especially over the last couple of years, however its not perfect yet. Wine/Cedega is excellent, however its not yet upto windows performance with dx9, and with dx10 coming soon i think that gaming is going to leap ahead on windows. Thats the main (imo) reason why windows is so popular.

Also dell are going to introduce linux based computers, however i cant see most people buying a linux PC.

Over 90% of Linux sold computers end up runing a pirated version of Windows. -Reuters. Anyway, I really don't think mac OS is a beginners OS. I prefer it because it's fun to use, it's stable, and I find myself migrating back to macs. If you want to, you can use it advanced, by using Xcode 2.2 creating universal binaries, or using the terminal to use some command codes. It's a great OS, and a very stable one at that. My boot times are signifigantly faster at that. Gaming, well, macs are getting more games, myself, I'll just get the game system, use that for games, and my mac for computing. Tomorrow, I am going to take, and post a whole load of pictures for everyone to view, on just how OS X 86 is doing.

Ok, here's one screenshot of 10.4.3 Build 8F1111A. Notice how grainy the picture is, apparently, pre-release builds of OSX do this, as the public release in 2001 did the same for 10.0 PowerPC. Apparently, it's a bunch of 0s and 1s. Anyway here's a basic screenshot. I will post some unibins later, such as VLC, iTunes Intel version, Transmission, and also some PPC applications running under rosetta, such as the fully working Microsoft Office. I will also see if I can get a shot of darwine, as of right now, there is a version compiled for Intel, but I can't get it to work.

Dreamweaver works perfectly,

Macrmedia Flash Professional 8

Microsoft Word 2004

The GIMP, photoshop Pic soon.

Roxio Software

iPhoto

iMovie HD

It's just commercial linux, why not just use some distro with gnome and get an aqua theme.

Because then you couldn't have the special Apple case, or be locked into Apple hardware which you paid too much for, or be an Apple fanboy (not saying you are 000), or be enough of a noob that all the above are requirements or you could not set it up yourself - the latter being the vast majority of the PC market.



OS X might be a nice OS for some, I get the positive points, but I'm just not comfortable with it. No, the OS isn't really bad at all, for most people - it's the rest of the package that ruins the deal. I don't quite see where Apple is going with this. They're now on the same hardware as Windows, but with TCPM chips to protection - but from what? No one in their right mind is going to buy expensive Apple hardware unless they want a 'pretty' case just to try to install Windows or something. No, they'll buy a cheaper Windows box. I'm not sure what TCPM does for Apple, other than stopping the install of the OS on other boxes, but then why don't they sell it for all computers? An OS that is noob-friendly (probably more so than Windows) and that has been proven to work, why not open up the market and fight Windows directly? Sell copies like you could buy Windows and get into a price war, try to score some OEM deals? It might risk their hardware sector a bit, but then, people who want the Mac-look can still buy from Apple.







I think the future of Apple lies in the iPod, not the PC.