Hadn't seen this reply yet, but like I wrote in my earlier post, Apple hasn't joined the many companies, as it was one of if not the first company to do this. ARM spun off from Acorn as a joint venture between Acorn, Apple and VLSI Technologies. Also, when Apple started bleeding money that decade, apparently it sold parts of its 43 percent share, which according to John Sculley also helped finance the NeXT merger. Really, in a way, Apple has deep roots in ARM, that have been sprouting over the last decade and are only continuing to do so, which has allowed Apple to flourish.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
RIP OS X/macOS 10
- Thread starter timidpimpin
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It sure was.So I'm right that my mid-2012 MBP was built like a tank...
And the 2015 12" MacBook was a sign of things to come.
[automerge]1593010611[/automerge]
I gotta say, the pastel wallpaper looks awesome in greyscale - that + Dark Mode = win
Last edited:
Several seem to be having "activation" errors with Bur Sur. Something to watch out for.
forums.macrumors.com
WARNING: Activation Lock after Big Sur Install
Hey everybody, wanted to provide a word of caution to those considering installing the beta. I woke up this morning to my Mac in Activation Lock and saying that my Mac is linked to another Apple ID. I tried everything (booting into recovery mode, safe mode, erasing and removing from iCloud) and...
forums.macrumors.com
I wonder if next we get 12.0? I thought the reason we kept 10.x for so long was to maintain Mac OS X... the .x was the 'real' version number.
Apple should just skip some numbers if so for parity:
macOS 15
iPad OS 15
iOS 15
watchOS 15
tvOS 15
etc.
[automerge]1593018503[/automerge]
I think the fear for us old-timers isn't the new coat of paint but fears that macOS will resemble iOS in looks and functionality.
Apple should just skip some numbers if so for parity:
macOS 15
iPad OS 15
iOS 15
watchOS 15
tvOS 15
etc.
[automerge]1593018503[/automerge]
I get why they do it and this is one of the reasons for sure.
I think the fear for us old-timers isn't the new coat of paint but fears that macOS will resemble iOS in looks and functionality.
Big Sur is the 17th major version, so 17 it would have to be for parity.
[automerge]1593019997[/automerge]
That's it.
[automerge]1593020404[/automerge]
The joy of betas.Several seem to be having "activation" errors with Bur Sur. Something to watch out for.
WARNING: Activation Lock after Big Sur Install
Hey everybody, wanted to provide a word of caution to those considering installing the beta. I woke up this morning to my Mac in Activation Lock and saying that my Mac is linked to another Apple ID. I tried everything (booting into recovery mode, safe mode, erasing and removing from iCloud) and...
Last edited:
I really hope the move to Arm and macOS 11 will prove something of a renaissance for the mac.
Apple unifying all their devices in one CPU-architecture and one software ecosystem might be just what the mac needs to step out of the long shadow of the i-devices.
Working backwards, I've always assumed that the ultimate evolution of the home computer will be a screen that connects to the internet, essentially the network computer concept that was so beloved of Larry Ellison in the late 1990s. It would either stream games or have enough local processing power to run games, but the big debate won't so much be between different operating systems as between slightly different graphics APIs. The operating system will be as obscure to the man and woman in the street as the operating system of the typical smart television is nowadays.
People will of course still need to render video, but that strikes me as something ideally suited to off-site server farms, in which case the big problem is fast, secure data transfer rather than local processing power - a network engineering problem. The remote servers will of course need an operating system, but that won't be something the average user needs to worry about.
Of course that kind of thing is years away. It may well be that there is an upper limit to the amount of data that can be transmitted from one part of the world to another. The speed of light will always be a problem, although speculative pipelining might be able to ameliorate that.
The internet was really the killer app for home computers, the thing that made them ubiquitous. For millions of new computer owners in the 1990s the local operating system was just a means of getting on the internet. According to these figures more PCs were sold in 1996 than from 1981-1991, and the number has only increased since then.:
In fact judging by those figures more home computers of any kind were sold from 2000-2004 than from 1975-1999, so from a historical perspective - from the perspective of someone looking back from the year 2100 - the evolution of MacOS and OSX and Windows and CP/M, CYCLADES and XANADU etc, and all the untaken paths etc, they are just a small historical curiosity.
They were all just means to an end. Methods by which the great mass of humanity could watch a 23-year-old multimillionaire pretend to be surprised by a new weapon in Fortnite, in 4K, at 120fps. Think of all the billions of people who died before Fortnite streaming was a thing. They never knew what we would become.
I think that those numbers can't NECESSARILY be traced to just the internet, especially since in 1996 for most people the internet was relatively slow and also somewhat expensive. AOL and Compuserve were ubiquitous, but most people were connecting on a 56K modem(that at my house, several miles from the Central Office over copper, 36,600 was a good day 28,800 was typical, and 14,400 was regular, or even an occasional busy signal) that tied up the phone line for the rest of the house. Yes, we did eventually have a second phone line put in mostly for internet use, and we were some of the first customers in our neighborhood for broadband(cable) when it was available in ~2001 at a blazing 512K. BTW, in those days, a lot of AOL plans were billed/payed based on actual usage and/or connections. Of course, you did have AOL's "aggressive" marketing with mass-mailing disks to people's houses(if nothing else, they're a ubiquitous source of floppies both back then and now for the vintage hobbiest scavenging them).
I suspect that a lot of what went into increasing sales of home computers was the falling price and the fact that operating systems like Windows 95 were at least somewhat easier to use than their predecessors(of course no one ever thought to look at Macs, which had full blown GUIs in 1984) since they didn't by default boot to a DOS prompt.
By the late 90s, I remember complete computers from "budget" brands like eMachines being ~$300. That's a staggeringly low price in comparison to even early 90s low end computers, and a P3-based Celeron was a heck of a better processor than you would get for $2K in 1990.
This thread is great discussion, but it will become obvious very quickly that PowerPC Macs are going to become more antiques and collector pieces instead of usable internet machines. They will always do what they did as stand alone machines, but it will get harder and harder to transfer that work to a modern computer.
When VNC and file sharing stops working between MacOS and Leopard, I'll probably move my machine into the basement.
I relish the past. I welcome the future.
When VNC and file sharing stops working between MacOS and Leopard, I'll probably move my machine into the basement.
I relish the past. I welcome the future.
As usual that depends on your expectations to some extent (but I'd be inclined to agree somewhat) - however, that happens irrespectively of the newly announced plans.
[automerge]1593096435[/automerge]
Oh yeah - anyone doin' 450 MHz on a 300 MHz Celeron back in the day?
Interesting times ... I didn't take part neither in the move from os9 to OSX nor that from PPC to intel.
So, this time is a novelty ...
In respect to my bunch of old and newer hardware Mojave (native and by Patch) for now seemed to me the final version of OSX/macOS, that would fit all my current needs (32-bit-support, stay with HFS+; ScreenSharing and AFP FileSharing with PPC).
Now it's clear, that Catalina or anything beyond never will be an option anymore for my current setting of PPCs/intels
Big Sur and ARM look really interesting and melting iOS and macOS together certainly will become a great user experience, but I fear, that will hang macOS users on the same drip, as all the mobile operating-systems do.
Hope my last stand, the mid-2012 15"MBP9,1 and Mochave will serve me well for the next decade...
At least the tasks will define, if a system isn't sufficient anymore.
Operating Systems or hardware in first instance should use their respective releasing date instead of any fantasy version-naming.
So, this time is a novelty ...
In respect to my bunch of old and newer hardware Mojave (native and by Patch) for now seemed to me the final version of OSX/macOS, that would fit all my current needs (32-bit-support, stay with HFS+; ScreenSharing and AFP FileSharing with PPC).
Now it's clear, that Catalina or anything beyond never will be an option anymore for my current setting of PPCs/intels
Big Sur and ARM look really interesting and melting iOS and macOS together certainly will become a great user experience, but I fear, that will hang macOS users on the same drip, as all the mobile operating-systems do.
Hope my last stand, the mid-2012 15"MBP9,1 and Mochave will serve me well for the next decade...
At least the tasks will define, if a system isn't sufficient anymore.
Operating Systems or hardware in first instance should use their respective releasing date instead of any fantasy version-naming.
Yep, task has priority - but there's difference between a workbench and a monitor.
That's the reason, Mojave will be my last version of OSX, that I'm gonne use for now, cause it'll be the last option to be downward compatible to the rest of the herd ... (until death or web/cloud-services/streaming/etc. will be separating us).
Last edited:
Remember the BP6 motherboard? Dual overclocked 300A Celeries. Good times. My OS/2 flew on that.
Not too long ago, in my move, one of the "tough calls" that didn't make the cut was a Compaq that my aunt bought new in the early 2000s. It really was through-and-through a low end computer, with no AGP(only PCI) and I think came with something. I think it was maybe a 700mhz Celeron.
I'd fitted a decently clocked(900mhz?) P3(Coppermine? Tulatin? don't recall) and it was decent but still had to get around it not being a good basis to build something out of given that I couldn't put a decent GPU to match the CPU in it.
One that I DID keep was a dual P3 450mhz Xeon with the Slot-A P2 type CPUs. That thing is a beast-I'm ashamed to admit that for a while, the only thing I did with it was boot off the floppy and flash AGP cards for the Mac. Actually, I think it still has my WANG 6200 in it.
I'd fitted a decently clocked(900mhz?) P3(Coppermine? Tulatin? don't recall) and it was decent but still had to get around it not being a good basis to build something out of given that I couldn't put a decent GPU to match the CPU in it.
One that I DID keep was a dual P3 450mhz Xeon with the Slot-A P2 type CPUs. That thing is a beast-I'm ashamed to admit that for a while, the only thing I did with it was boot off the floppy and flash AGP cards for the Mac. Actually, I think it still has my WANG 6200 in it.
Not that excited about Big Sur. I'm in the camp of being worried about Mac OS becoming restricted like iOS. I don't mind the walled garden on my iPhone, but on a desktop or laptop I want the freedom to install whatever apps I want. Not sure if I would buy a new Mac due to the lack of being able to upgrade the RAM and HDD in most models. I doubt switching to ARM will change things on that front. I think the newest Mac I would buy would be the mid-2012 non-retina MBP and the newest Mac OS I would use would be Mojave.
I think the first siren call has been the locking of some of the newer notebooks after installing Big Sur thanks to the T2 chip as that bug thread has highlighted. Microsoft has been pushing you to log in to Windows 10 via your Microsoft ID, even on an unnetworked computer and makes it a bit of chore to switch to a local log in.
These are all due to "improved security" but it is one more nail in the coffin of genuinely owning your own hardware. Drivers are already locked down to a great extent. I think apps will be forced into the walled garden before too long.
This is getting very interesting already:
macOS 11 Big Sur on Unsupported Macs Thread
This thread will be used to discuss advancements in getting macOS 11.0 Big Sur running on unsupported Macs. --- Compatibility List: --- FAQ: Q: What does unsupported mean for my old Mac? A: Three problems: Apple locks you out from running the stock installer of Big Sur and as...
I'd like to add that we will finally see the end of hackintosh and the end of intel. ARM will finish what PowerPC could not - this is for all of us and we in the PPC community should embrace it.
[automerge]1593220637[/automerge]
Since they are both RISC processors, it shouldn't be too hard compared to Intel CISC. ARM is us incarnate - PowerPC's victory over intel with a brand new processor called ARM PPC V2 on steroids. Yes, PowerPC has won the war and RISC has been restored to the MAC once more. THINK DIFFERENT II !
As much I would love to see Intel fails and their reign over the computer instruction set (x86) ARM it's not PowerPC in the sense or openness (neither PowerPC in the AIM alliance days). The war in the days was RISC vs CISC and existed more options of architectures than today for computers. Apple it's driven by money and profit (like 99,99% of all other companies) not by think different and their move to ARM (like their move to Intel) it's to achieve more of their philosophy of control over their equipment (remember that every Apple computer it's slowly towards less repairability and upgradeability) and only allow their operating systems (there's "nothing wrong" with loving OSX but some people like having more options, and so far the minimum information says that these new ARM will behave like an iPad or iPhone on the boot loader). Unfortunately the Apple PowerPC days are more then in the past (because now they are now OpenPOWER, POWER9 and Power ISA) and I like most of PowerPC machines like many of us here.
This has been established multiple times already. You can't help those refusing to acknowledge facts. Over and out.
Last edited:
Does anyone like the look of Big Sur? Are you looking forward to it?
I love these guys informative videos Could we see macs with a touch screen?
Could we see macs with a touch screen?
Last edited:
I wonder to which extend virtual machines could be installed:
Hardware capable enough to emulate an intel-cpu?
MacOS excluding emulators (like in iOS)?
Hardware capable enough to emulate an intel-cpu?
MacOS excluding emulators (like in iOS)?
I'm sure QEMU will be ported and emulation of x86 CPUs will be possible, although quite slow (initially). Whether we're going to see a new Virtual PC remains to be seen.
Virtualising other ARM OSes is already possible (it was demo'ed during WWDC with Linux running in Parallels Desktop hooking into macOS' hypervisor).
In all honesty though, this was going to happen regardless of Apple switching to ARM or not. It's already happening/already has happened to Apple's 32-bit Core Duo Macs. I haven't been keeping up to date with the state of PPC Linux, but I'm sure that running Lubuntu 16.04 would yield a generally far more usable internet machine than 10.4 or 10.5.