A Bit of History Behind the Mac OS X on Intel Project "Marklar"

[Suboptimus]

Agree that the basic OS X kernel (derived from the Mach kernel developed at Carnegie-Mellon) is essentially the same as that of iOS. But all the "fat" has been trimmed away from the higher layers. Especially, as you point out, the GUI layer.

Looking forward to 64-bit multi-core ARM-based AX SoCs on iPhone and iPad. I think the 64-bit data path is the gating factor in using said chips on Macs.

It's way more than the kernel. Basically the entire software stack is the same for OS X and iOS, probably 95% the same code.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

Sony had only just launched the VAIO range around that time. The quality and support for the first three years was vastly superior to anything since. I worked in a PC store at the time and the buzz around the product was second only to the iMac/iBook. They were *the* Windows notebook to own at the time.

That makes sense. Sony, in the beginning rocked with a lot of their technology and kept their stuff 'clean' and productive. Then their quality went south but the prices didn't. It's sad actually... To a lesser extent, Apple themselves have let some of their quality slip a little too, although I'd still put a MPB above nearly any other system out there as being an excellent system. We had a client switch to MBP's for their field animals and they have survived extremely well. One of the early pre-unibody MBP systems had a huge dent in the latch edge of the case, big enough that the thing wouldn't close, and it still chugged along.

 

[pure3d2]

This thread says there are 6 pages but I can't get to it--it keeps taking me back to page 5.

 

[cjmillsnun]

*this post has been deleted by the poster*

 

[pdjudd]

This thread says there are 6 pages but I can't get to it--it keeps taking me back to page 5.

That happens - probably just a bug with the forum software. The last page is probably just a placeholder or something when the limit for posts/page or something.

 

[ssgbryan]

IBM can blame themselves for losing a big partner like Apple on this. They failed to deliver a G5 (or any processor faster than Motorolla's G4) for the laptop series. Apple laptops were stuck with aged and underpowered G4 for a long time waiting for IBM to deliver something new. Apple had to move on eventually, or lose the laptop market entirely.

I'm not glad to say this, though. PowerPC processors seemed to have a better architecture, leading to a great performance on lower clock speeds than Intel's cpus.

IBM failed to deliver at a price Steve was willing to pay. Go take a look at the Power5, Power6 and Power7 chips and talk again about "something new."

 

[foidulus]

Lets not forget how bad Apples notebooks were in 2005....

I think the thing a lot of people seem to forget about the end of the PowerPC era was just how bad Apples once vaunted line of notebooks had really become. The PowerBook basically went nowhere for years, in 2003 the top end CPU was 1.33 GHz, 2 years later it was 1.67, and Apple even did a "bump" where they didnt actually upgrade the CPU at all. It had gotten so bad that Apple was intentionally crippling the iBook just so there would be *SOME* product differentiation, because the CPU speeds on the top end had gone nowhere and Apple couldn't just keep on putting the same lower-end CPUs in the iBooks....

Even as someone who owned a 2005 Powerbook, I have to say that the machine was somewhat of an embarrassment, the performance per dollar when compared to Intel machines was pathetic. I think that running Windows wasnt the only reason for the large-scale switch to mac post-Intel transition, the Intel notebooks where the first notebooks from Apple probably since the early powerbooks that were competitive on both hardware AND software.

 

[LeandrodaFL]

Intel is now holding back Apple. They will only ship new macbooks 1 year from now, when Intel gives us the sucessor of Ivy Brdige. Heck, the current desktop macs are still sandy bridge, while any one can build ivy bridge PCs.

I miss the days Apple released new computers every 6 months...

 

[LeandrodaFL]

Oh, and I dont get it, why were people at Apple so crazy about putting Mac Os in a Sony Vaio? Werent the macbooks faster and more elegant?

Why was Steve Jobs going to meet Sony's president, whats this excitment about?

 

[antonis]

IBM failed to deliver at a price Steve was willing to pay. Go take a look at the Power5, Power6 and Power7 chips and talk again about "something new."

I thought it is pretty clear I talked about laptops. Everyone knows that IBM stated that they were not planning to deliver a notebook version of their G5 back then, which was the real reason for Apple turning to Intel. So, how many laptops are there wearing these IBM cpus ?