Mac OS X on a PC?

[RacerX]

I don't want to engage in a fruitless argument, particularly with a hardcore fanboy

Hmmm, fanboy? That is an interesting label... care to explain it?

but I do want to suggest that accusing Intel and AMD of copying somebody else's technology isn't necessarily truthful.

It is not only necessarily truthful, it is (more importantly) historically accurate.

My understanding of IBM's approach to their 64 bit technology was that they started with a server processor and downscaled it for desktop use,

The POWER line of processors were designed (and are used) for both servers and workstations. The POWER4 is sold in IBM workstations, just like the POWER3 series and the PowerPC 604e before it.

Part of the reason for the PowerPC 970 was that the POWER3 and PowerPC 604e are both 32-bit processors while the POWER4 is a 64-bit processor. For IBM's clients, most of their existing applications were 32-bit which made the move to the 64-bit POWER4 systems a hard sell. The PowerPC 970 was designed to bridge that gap by being both 32-bit and 64-bit compatible.

But it was an Apple tech that told me that, so I can't verify its accuracy...

That is understandable. I have a long history using UNIX based systems and have been following that industry for years (I, personally, like SGIs, but own a few Suns and have worked with many other types of UNIX systems). Most Apple techs don't follow what is happening outside the Apple community (very much like how PC users tend not to follow things outside the PC community I would add), so it is not surprising that you would get such mistaken information.



And you are right, it would be fruitless for you to argue if that information is the foundation of your arguments.

 

[PCMacUser]

oh well

 

[RacerX]

That's not a very nice thing to say. Quite insulting really.

I'm sorry, maybe I should have used a comment like fanboy.

It appears that you are primarily concerned with displaying some sort of technical superiority over other people.

Well, if avoiding speaking on topics I don't know much about and commenting on topics I do is displaying some sort of technical superiority, then I'm guilty as charged.

Funny, part of the reason for reading in such forums is to gain knowledge. I post in only a fraction of the threads I read and then only if I feel I have something useful to add (or someone directs a comment at me ).

 

[PCMacUser]

I'm sorry, maybe I should have used a comment like fanboy.


Well, if avoiding speaking on topics I don't know much about and commenting on topics I do is displaying some sort of technical superiority, then I'm guilty as charged.

Funny, part of the reason for reading in such forums is to gain knowledge. I post in only a fraction of the threads I read and then only if I feel I have something useful to add (or someone directs a comment at me ).

My apologies.

 

[racedvr]

Mac Os X on a PC

This would be like Chevy saying to Mercedes, Hey we like your product so much and we know how popular you have become lately, do you mind if we sell one of our cars with your name on it? The point here is that there are so many features that make a Mac a Mac there is no way an Intel box could ever be what a Mac is. Besides, there is tremedous value in being the most desired player in the PC market. If effect what the PC makers are saying is let us make money on the creativity and hard work of Apple. I certainly hope Apple does not simply license the OS. Instead, Apple should just make them a reseller if they want to sell OS X. If you want a Mac, buy a Mac!

 

[PCMacUser]

This would be like Chevy saying to Mercedes, Hey we like your product so much and we know how popular you have become lately, do you mind if we sell one of our cars with your name on it? The point here is that there are so many features that make a Mac a Mac there is no way an Intel box could ever be what a Mac is. Besides, there is tremedous value in being the most desired player in the PC market. If effect what the PC makers are saying is let us make money on the creativity and hard work of Apple. I certainly hope Apple does not simply license the OS. Instead, Apple should just make them a reseller if they want to sell OS X. If you want a Mac, buy a Mac!

Should Mac users be forbidden to run Windows XP or any MS operating system on Apple hardware natively or under Virtual PC?

 

[BenRoethig]

To be honest, I think the iMac is quite cool looking (although I think they should bring out a "U2" coloured version), but the first thing that goes through my head when I look at it is 'how am I going to install any extra hardware in that?', so I'd have to go for the ATX styled case like a G5 Powermac.

I think you're taking what I said a bit out of context. Looking back I think I should have been more clear. One of the arguments to opening up the platform or porting it to x86 has been that Apple will lose sales like they did with the clones. Apple makes very different machines. Most of the people are here because they want something other than an ATX case. Apple would sell about the same amount of computers because they have a loyal, if not fanatical following.

 

[BenRoethig]

This would be like Chevy saying to Mercedes, Hey we like your product so much and we know how popular you have become lately, do you mind if we sell one of our cars with your name on it? The point here is that there are so many features that make a Mac a Mac there is no way an Intel box could ever be what a Mac is. Besides, there is tremedous value in being the most desired player in the PC market. If effect what the PC makers are saying is let us make money on the creativity and hard work of Apple. I certainly hope Apple does not simply license the OS. Instead, Apple should just make them a reseller if they want to sell OS X. If you want a Mac, buy a Mac!

Using the car Analogy, I see the situation more like this: Mercedes's Smart division develops a new revolutionary engine. Instead of licensing the technology to others and making a ton of money, Smart expects everyone to go out and buy a fourfour.

 

[BarfBag]

I've said it once and I'll say it again...

Apple should allow Mac clones. Not PC's, PowerPC computers that support Mac OS X. They could even sell the different parts themselves. I've been wanting to buy a Mac for years, but the main reason I haven't (besides not having the money) is the pride you have when you build your own. You feel so proud of yourself. It's just hard to give up that feeling.

 

[BenRoethig]

Sorry, but you (a person who builds his own PCs) are part of a small minority of people which PC manufacturers (including Apple) don't care about. In their eyes, people like you don't count. You don't add to market share and you most likely never will.

But, those people are the ones the normal people ask about which computer to buy. Most of them will tell people flat out that Macs suck. I've seen it happen. My family was all set to buy a iMac, but my pc fanboy cousins convinced them to buy a windows PC instead. The worst part of the situation is that I've been the one who's had to work on it.

 

[BenRoethig]

I've said it once and I'll say it again...

Apple should allow Mac clones. Not PC's, PowerPC computers that support Mac OS X. They could even sell the different parts themselves. I've been wanting to buy a Mac for years, but the main reason I haven't (besides not having the money) is the pride you have when you build your own. You feel so proud of yourself. It's just hard to give up that feeling.

Using the same chipsets as Apple.

 

[Mord]

Battleing to get someone to get a mac is a hard task just ask them why they wouldent want to get a mac and tell them why all there reasons are BS, one of my friends was told by a pc fanboy that "macs are slow and dont have radeons or geforces so cant play any games, they dont have any software, you cant move files from a pc to a mac because the files are written differently, you cant use macs and pc's on the same network and macs cant use the internet because Microsoft wrote internet explorer, i set him straight and he's getting a 12" powerbook. dont let them accept the pc fanboy s**t.

 

[BarfBag]

Using the same chipsets as Apple.

Exactly!

 

[Mord]

we are over 1.5 years since Apple first released their first G5 tower and chips have only gone from 1.6 to 2.5GHz. Where is that ever elusive 3GHz system Job's was promising over 6 months ago?

i think you will find the g5 has gone from 2GHz to 2.5GHz (+25%) compared with AMD who went from 2.2GHz to 2.6GHz (+18%) and intel who went from 3.2GHz to 3.8GHz (19%) the G5 is a kick ass chip and is ramping up better than all the competition, .

people need to stop with the where is the 3GHz thing no one could have known how sucky the transition to 90nm would be and the g5 has done a heck of allot better on it than any other chip.

 

[JesterJJZ]

I dunno if this has been brought up before, but what if instead of Apple making OSX able to run on PCs, they came out with an Apple line of PC Hardware that ran an X86 version of OSX and could only run on Apple PC hardware. Right now I have a Mac and a PC. I'd rather have an Apple Mac and an Apple PC.

 

[RacerX]

Yes, I believe someone has brought it up before.

Still, could I get some clarification on this:

Right now I have a Mac and a PC. I'd rather have an Apple Mac and an Apple PC.

Exactly how would an Apple PC replace your current PC in a way that your current Apple Mac hasn't? What magical ability are you envisioning for this Apple PC? Are you thinking it'll run Windows software? I'm assuming that is why you have a PC.

 

[PCMacUser]

I dunno if this has been brought up before, but what if instead of Apple making OSX able to run on PCs, they came out with an Apple line of PC Hardware that ran an X86 version of OSX and could only run on Apple PC hardware. Right now I have a Mac and a PC. I'd rather have an Apple Mac and an Apple PC.

I think if Apple were to bring out a PC, it would be tough to get people buying it unless it were at a competitive price. In a similar situation, Acorn Computers released the 'Acorn PC' during the early 90's to supplement its own line of RISC-based computers, but it flopped badly largely due to its high price. And if I remember correctly, Amiga tried the same thing too...

 

[Benjamindaines]

NEVER guna happen!!! Apple makes all its money from hardware not its OS apple would die.

 

[Bonsaichop]

im probably going to be flasmed for this but please remember

PC = personal computer

mac = macintosh = personal computer

x86 = intel based = personal computer

Perhaps people should refer to an intel port of osx as an x86 based osx, it just gets mighty confusing reading apple mac and apple pc when essentially its the same thing.

 

[JesterJJZ]

Yes, I believe someone has brought it up before.

Still, could I get some clarification on this:

Exactly how would an Apple PC replace your current PC in a way that your current Apple Mac hasn't? What magical ability are you envisioning for this Apple PC? Are you thinking it'll run Windows software? I'm assuming that is why you have a PC.

I think a highend Apple made PC with dual intel or amd chips, running an x86 version of OSX would be great. There are a few programs that I use that are pc only. In essence I'd like a PowerMac that can run windows programs natively, at full speed without the use of something like VPC.

And yes I'm a mac fan. Which is why if I have to use a "PC" I'd rather have one made by Apple.

 

[RacerX]

There are a few programs that I use that are pc only. In essence I'd like a PowerMac that can run windows programs natively, at full speed without the use of something like VPC.

And there is the problem. An Apple PC (x86 based) running Mac OS X (for x86) is not going to run those programs you currently use a PC for now.

I have an IBM ThinkPad that I've been running Rhapsody on for a little more than five years. Not once in that time have I ever been able to run a single Windows app on that system. Why? Because it is not Windows.

If my experiences with the only Apple operating system to ever be released for both Apple hardware and x86 PCs are anything to go on, then at best you would be getting the same apps on both systems and at worst you would get a subset of the apps that run on Apple hardware.

One of the reasons I have Rhapsody running on both an IBM ThinkPad and a PowerMac 7500 is because there were some apps that were never ported to the x86 version of Rhapsody.

 

[Mord]

WINE, obviously Windows apps would not run under a x86 version of mac os x unless you have the windows API's which you can have with WINE.

 

[jane doe]

Every once and a while I see a thread like this and get a chuckle. There is no x86 version of OS X. There is a X86 version of Darwin. Thats about as close as it comes.

 

[RacerX]

Thats about as close as it comes.

So I'm guessing that you don't think that something like this (attached) is any closer.

 

[jane doe]

Development on that stopped a long time ago. its not practical to work on something like that from a resource management stand point.