OSX on x86

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by agreenster, Nov 21, 2002.

  1. agreenster macrumors 68000


    Dec 6, 2001
    Walt Disney Animation Studios
    I know, I know, the rumor is totally old. But someone here posted a link to an article I thought everyone would find interesting. Here's an excerpt:

    Well, you see, Mac OS X is a UNIX. Under the surface it runs a 4.4 BSD kernel derived from FreeBSD 3.2. That, in turn, runs on top of a Mach 3.0 message-passing microkernel. Microkernels were all the rage in OS research about 10–15 years ago, but are now generally considered to be underperforming for most purposes. Richard Stallman's perennial OS project, GNU Hurd, is based on the very same Mach 3.0 microkernel. An interesting side note is that both the Mach 3.0 microkernel and FreeBSD also run very nicely on the Intel i386 platform. It would, therefore, only require a recompilation of Mac OS X to run on the Pentium. There are rumors, indeed, that Apple does have such a port ready internally.

    Here is the link. It's from byte.com
  2. sickboy_osX macrumors regular

    Aug 27, 2002
    Pocatello, Idaho
    Mac OS X is not running on i386. It is running on a top secret AMD RISC system, They did however recompile it for the new hooks, that are needed.

    The cases are welded shut because of this, and the little bit I have been able to glean from my sources (Who work with apple very closesly on printing syste ms) is when you try to look at details of the processor on the system from OS X it doesnt work, and just gives you a blank screen.

    And the processor query doesnt work either.

    This is just what i have heard.
  3. agreenster thread starter macrumors 68000


    Dec 6, 2001
    Walt Disney Animation Studios
    I find it very interesting that the OSX on AMD rumors spread like wildfire, and then fizzled when Ruiz's speech was full of....'nothing.'

    Anyway, alot of people misconstrued the rumor to be that OSX was to be available for PC's, when really it was all about AMD supplying a chip for a new proprietary Apple box. Of course, the OSX on the 'Dell' or 'Compaq' PC idea was nonsense, so people never considered the possibility that Apple is only exploring other options in regard to chip development.

    IBM, AMD, or even Motorola (again) are all very probable in my opinion to be Apple's next big chip partner. (which is basically just saying that its ANYONE's game) Regardless of who it is, Im glad that Apple is starting to realize that in order to meet the ever growing needs of the consumer, they need to up their chip.

    I know many people here scream that speed isnt important, but thats just not true. Digital photography is on a major rise with the typical consumer, gaming has always been processor intensive, Video editing and production requires major processor and video card power (which Apple has always pushed), and of course my personal favorite- 3D production (which Apple is dying to get into on a professional level with Maya and Shake > Linux boxes are already weening everyone in the industry away from SGI).

    Apple's performance isnt there yet, but hopefully they will be soon. Maybe IBM will come through with the Power4 or 970. Maybe AMD's are in all the PowerMacs ready for MWSF :)rolleyes: ). Hell, maybe the G4 has another year in it. Regardless, there's nothing wrong with us wanting more performance and power from our favorite company.
  4. Thirteenva macrumors 6502a

    Jul 18, 2002
    I don't mean any offense to the person who started this thread but i'm getting tired of hearing about this. Seems like the same links and articles get posted all the time as "proof" of OS X on x86.

    We know its possible to compile OS X for x86.

    We know that apple must have at least one computer in house testing this.(aka marklar project).

    So now failing any credible rumors that apple is going to go through with this as a commercial product, i don't see any reason why there needs to be all these posts springing up about "OS X on x86". This is getting as bad, if not worse, than the apple PDA rumors.....:rolleyes:
  5. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    May 19, 2002
    Bring back the iBrator threads.

    Definitely one of the more pleasurable rumors, even if it was fiction.
  6. agreenster thread starter macrumors 68000


    Dec 6, 2001
    Walt Disney Animation Studios
    No one is making you read these threads, nor post on them. If you have nothing to say, there's plenty of other forums on MacRumors.

    Just because you dont see a reason to have 'all these posts' doesnt mean other people dont have the right to talk about it.

    What is it with all these people here who are making judgements? Why do they think they should be able to tell others what to post?

    Lets try to stay on subject before arn closes this thread down, because I'd really like to know if Apple is seriously considering AMD systems. Stickboy_OSX really seems to think so, and Id like to know if he has any more proof of this.
  7. Thirteenva macrumors 6502a

    Jul 18, 2002
    Guess you decided to take offense anyway....
  8. e-coli macrumors 68000


    Jul 27, 2002
    you mean any proof of this.
  9. jefhatfield Retired


    Jul 9, 2000
    maybe the amd or intel thing won't happen soon, but it seems inevitable unless ibm or moto get off their (you know what) and give apple a really fast chip(s)

    as long as apple computers work better than their pc counterparts, i will be relatively happy
  10. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Jun 25, 2002
    Gone but not forgotten.
    Well, if AMD does what I've been suggesting the last 3 years, they'll emulate PPC instrcutions on their Athlon (or newer) core instead of emulating x86 instructions.

    This keeps Apple in the proprietary hardware business, gives AMD something to do while they're waiting for the PC market to wake up to their brilliance, and gives Mac users real power in something other than Photoshop.

    I don't need an x86 machine, I need an AMD core running my current software. :)
  11. vniow macrumors G4

    Jul 18, 2002
    I accidentally my whole location.

    Isn't that sorta what they do now? (scuse me if I'm just restating what you just said)
    I mean, I don't think the Athlon is an x86 chip at it's core, it has an x86 emulation layer right?

    If AMD can get their asses in gear, would it be entirely unfeasable to replace that layer with a PPC emulation one?

Share This Page