"Things that have never been done before"

[kapouer]

what would be incredibly new

let's dream a little
osx has darwin as the core os, darwin can run on x86,
but in fact it could run on any human-mad computer as well.
just look the hardware supported by a standard linux-like OS.
What is wrong with that ? A developer must compile and optimize his
application for each platform, which is not every time easy
because he must be able to provide support for each harware.
One kind of solution is GPL, i.e. give the source ; that is not the right
solution for commercial software.
Think now for a definitive solution : provide in the core os
a sort of middle-level assembly language between english-style c and power pc or whatelse assembler.
(a sort of java but java is too high-level). A code that could be hardware
independent but sufficiently lowlevel : the only thing the os should do
to execute it would be some quick optimization-translation into a binary
file during the software installation. Then every time someone release
a soft, he can see it runs on any computer. The OS GUI itself could
benefit from that. The only software that remains hardware oriented
would be the translator-optimizator itself, which would need to keep track of all hardware supported and drivers created.
all that stuff would really be new and never done on any core os before.
Be sure it won't be in the next version of apple os.

 

[kapouer]

missing apple software

digital lifestyle...

iphoto
itunes
imovie idvd
quicktime
appleworks
people talk about a video conferencing app...why not.
microsoft delivers officex for mac, but there's already appleworks.
What else microsoft delivers ? IE ! And why IE isn't x native yet ?
Why updates are so slow and the developers crew so small ?
There's no apple web browser ! WHY ?
should we prepare for iweb ?

 

[sjs]

kapouer posted:
Think now for a definitive solution : provide in the core os
a sort of middle-level assembly language between english-style c and power pc or whatelse assembler.
(a sort of java but java is too high-level). A code that could be hardware
independent but sufficiently lowlevel : the only thing the os should do
to execute it would be some quick optimization-translation into a binary
file during the software installation. Then every time someone release
a soft, he can see it runs on any computer.

__________________________________________________

That is exactly what I meant by my earlier post. Apple stands most to benefit by a software compatibility solution that lies in the OS: kind of like incorporating Virtual PC into the OS so that it is much more efficient and much faster.

This would bust open the wintel market for Apple once and for all. Any attempt by MS to change its code to once again be incompatible would be squashed by the Justice Department.

Such an advance would be the best news we could get, like Steve told Sculley" Do you want to change the world?" This would be the start...

 

[mcrain]

Check out what Amiga is doing. They have software that runs on PPC chips, x86's, palms, Windows CE PDAs, etc... all hardware independent. In fact, once you've installed the Amiga "base" into the hardware, you can seamlessly transfer the software from machine to machine to machine and it all looks and runs identically.

The head of Amiga was on Screensavers demonstrating their stuff about 3 weeks ago.

 

[alex_ant]

Re: Dumb Question:

What in the hell am I doing up so late? I need a girlfriend.

Originally posted by sjs
On another thread there was discussion of moving to an IBM Power chip. But would doing that destroy all the effort that has gone into "optimizing" software for the G4 and Altivec?

If Apple could get its hands on a chip as fast as the Power4 (which I don't think is suited to a Mac, what with its 125-watt power draw and insane cost, however the technology is there, etc. etc. etc. - this is talked about in another thread ) - AltiVec would be obsolete. So I don't think it's too big of a deal. If this were the case, it might actually be a good idea to drop AltiVec and save software developers the grief of supporting a separate G4-only codebase.

Or, while they are down there in the bowels of OSX, could they put some code in that would retain all the advantages of altivec, but allow the speed enhancements to occur without specially written software, and maybe allow for a change to a completely different chip, like IBM's?

Although the Power4 is very different from the PPCs that Apple is using, it is PPC-compatible. The Power4 chips shipping today actually have 2 custom 64-bit PPC chips per die in an SMP configuration (I believe), and up to 4 of these units are available on a multi-chip module. The Power4 is very wicked, but, I don't think Apple could get it in their machines for much less than $10k per Mac. (Nevermind the scorchingly hot laptops with 20 minute battery life...)

Alex

 

[alex_ant]

GPU-accelerated Quartz and battery life/heat issues?

What do you think would be the effects of offloading various Quartz operations onto the GPU in terms of power consumption and heat production in laptops? As it stands now, my GPU is almost always mostly idle, since I almost never its 3D capabilities. Thus, it is not draining much power and not producing much heat. Would having the GPU accelerate certain Quartz operations instead of the CPU reduce the total energy consumption and/or heat production in the PowerBook/iBook?

Anything that causes the damned TiBook fan to come on even a tad less frequently is alright in my book. Just wondering what you all think.

Alex

 

[kapouer]

i think that all discussion about power chips or opengl quartz is
completely out of subject...don't you realize these are just minor
improvements ?!? The way osx is made allows for new chips, new
hardware, and of course there will be such.
Read again "things that have never been done before"...
imagine you read that about a car and someone tells you
it will be a new color or just a bigger motor...
What is new is in the structure of the system, something like I describe above or else, not just a hack that accelerates the GUI ! NEVER expect
that from apple !

 

[sjs]

kapouer is right that "of course" we will be getting newer, faster chips. That has always been the case, hopefully always will...same for "tweaks" to the OS that make it faster. As he says, these constitute things that HAVE been done before.

I think what Apple has got to be working on is a software/OS solution to incompatibility with Windows (even Linux). The coup of the century would be that one day Steve announces to developers an advance in the OS that lets them get Windows, etc software running on a Mac for ultra-low cost.

 

[Newborn77]

Re: I would hope...

Originally posted by Catfish_Man


...that the Power4 offers a bit better than 4 pipelines, considering the G4 has 7 if I remember correctly (possibly 8. It's either 2 integer, 1 FP, 4 Altivec, or 3 integer, 1 FP, 4 Altivec). I think you're confusing processor cores with pipelines, although I suppose the Power4 might have 4 pipelines because it doesn't have Altivec (2 int, 2 FP, or something like that)...

You are confusing pipelines with pipeline stages. The G4 has a 7-stage pipeline (at least the first G4s don't know about the current ones). That's 7 stages in 1 pipeline. Also... I don't remember how many pipelines the G4 has. Guess it's just one... or two? . I don't know about the Power4 but from what mcrain wrote I guess the chip has 4 pipelines with whatever stages on each one (didn't mention how many stages).

Of course I could be wrong and what mcrain meant was a 4-stage pipeline on the Power4 who knows. Could someone clarify this? Thanks.

 

[Newborn77]

Re: Re: Re: Thoughts on the new thingies...

Originally posted by Catfish_Man


Yeah! OpenGL GUI so it gets dumped on the graphics card instead of wasting CPU time. Keep it looking just the same, but do it in OpenGL instead of Quartz.

No, not an OpenGL GUI.
Quartz can be accelerated by a GPU just as well as OpenGL.
The problem is that Apple has not added this capability to the current video card drivers in OS X. So all Quartz does goes directly to the CPU for processing instead of going to the GPU on the graphics card.
But why didn't Apple just include this capability on their drivers?
My guess is that since Quartz uses vectors instead of bitmaps to draw everything on the screen they had to completely rewrite the drivers and that takes some time.
Anyone knows about a graphic card (better yet... drivers for that graphic card) that accelerates vector drawings instead of just bitmaps? (maybe in NeXT?).
If not then this could be the "never done before" stuff Apple is talking about.
Just a guess.
Cheers

 

[OSeXy!]

New

Not sure if this is a 'developer issue', but I'd like to see OS X go resolution-independent.
With the move to ever higher-resolution LCDs this will soon become a necessity, and I think Apple should get there first. The dock, for all it's weaknesses, shows how great this could be. Imagine if there were a 'slider' for the whole GUI which worked like the one that controls icon size in the dock. If menu bars, icons, and all other GUI objects could be adjusted in the same way we wouldn't have arguments over the readability of the iBook's screen: everyone could set the text, etc. to whatever size they want, without loss of quality (in the way scaling beyond the native resolution does...) I've seen Dell laptops with "great" 15" screens (1600 x 1200, I think), which are unusable in their native mode because the menus and icons are so small you go blind reading them. I'd like that density of image, but without killing my eyes...

 

[Catfish_Man]

Re: Re: I would hope...

Originally posted by Newborn77


You are confusing pipelines with pipeline stages. The G4 has a 7-stage pipeline (at least the first G4s don't know about the current ones). That's 7 stages in 1 pipeline. Also... I don't remember how many pipelines the G4 has. Guess it's just one... or two? . I don't know about the Power4 but from what mcrain wrote I guess the chip has 4 pipelines with whatever stages on each one (didn't mention how many stages).

Of course I could be wrong and what mcrain meant was a 4-stage pipeline on the Power4 who knows. Could someone clarify this? Thanks.

Nope, I'm not confusing pipelines with pipeline stages. One pipeline would mean it could only do integer math, two would mean non-superscalar integer and floating point. one OR two would mean no Altivec. We haven't had one pipeline chips since the older 68ks. Power4 may actually have 4 pipelines, it makes sense, since it doesn't have Altivec.

 

[sjs]

It is Sunday night almost 9 pm on the east coast. WWDC starts in about 12 hours.

Last chance to make a bold and insightful prediction...

What do YOU think Apple will announce, with regard to the OS, that will surprise and delight the most?

Jump in!

 

[Newborn77]

Re: Re: Re: I would hope...

Thanks for the info Catfish_Man!