Now that the source code for Windows XP has been leaked, would it be possible to compile XP for PowerPC Macs?
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.
Windows XP on PowerPC?
- Thread starter supremeleader573
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Even if we can compile Windows XP for PPC macs, what about graphics card and other peripherals drivers, programs (browsers, video&music players, document editors etc..) and everything else?
How much speed and reliability can we gain in comparison to Leopard and Linux distros? Updated security patches are also essential.
If this can all be sorted out and if it can be used a normal functioning OS that is good for daily use, it would be a good thing for us all.
Cheers, Nikola!
How much speed and reliability can we gain in comparison to Leopard and Linux distros? Updated security patches are also essential.
If this can all be sorted out and if it can be used a normal functioning OS that is good for daily use, it would be a good thing for us all.
Cheers, Nikola!
The source code for WinXP is Intel only. How do you intend to get it to run on RISC PPC architecture?
We can't forget about the need for a bootstrapper of sorts too, as OF definitely wouldn't like Windows XP right off the bat.
If we could decompile it and then compile it to PPC code, then that would work in theory.
What is an OS good for without it’s precious device drivers? XP’s strength at the time was the huge amount of (generic) drivers it came with. You don’t want to rewrite drivers for a different ISA, you don’t want to write drivers at all 
That may be true, but there are no generic drivers that would cover the scope of hardware that PPC Macs have. You may be able to make something work, but the result would likely be unstable at best. (I could be taking your post to mean the opposite of what you mean, so I greatly apologize if that's the case)What is an OS good for without it’s precious device drivers? XP’s strength at the time was the huge amount of (generic) drivers it came with. You don’t want to rewrite drivers for a different ISA, you don’t want to write drivers at all
NT 3.51/4.0 does run on ppc (not apple's tho).
Actually it ran on IBM's version of PPC at the time. Too bad it was short lived. After IBM and MS parted ways things changed for NT and Win.
Even if we somehow got that dinosaur to run, we'd have no applications to run on it.
Seems like even if it could be done, it would be like that PPC Beta of Snow Leopard. Nice proof of concept, totally useless.
Off-topic, though related:
It would be completely and utterly tragic, immoral, and terrible if someone leaked the complete source code of Snow Leopard, oh dear, oh my. Calamity.
It would be completely and utterly tragic, immoral, and terrible if someone leaked the complete source code of Snow Leopard, oh dear, oh my. Calamity.
Don't give me any ideas.
Don't give me any ideas.
Horrible, devastating, cataclysmic. The world will come unglued. Stop. Don’t.
I don't know, Tiger is tempting. Especially the PowerPC version, what with Classic just there. If anything, that would be worth it for me, all on its own. But I mean, if I'm going to be greedy, why not both? I know I'd certainly like to see Rosetta get used to run OS 9 apps.
I can dream, can't I?
Oh yeah - Tiger on modern Macs, please!
I wish I could recommend a great version of Linux for PPC that's fairly recent, however, I can't. I'm trying Ubuntu and not a fan, but perhaps I'll get it to do what I want.
My point was that you might be able to run some Windows software with that and Wine.
My point was that you might be able to run some Windows software with that and Wine.
I don't believe it does. It's in the name: WINE is Not an Emulator
Not without QEMU emulating an x86 cpu, it doesn't. And I only know that because I've gone out of my way to run Wine in the Linux Subsystem for Windows, which only allows x86-64 apps to run, while Wine pretty much universally tends to want to run in 32-bit mode. So effectively, you have to run QEMU to emulate a 32-bit x86 cpu on your 32-bit compatible x86 cpu.
It's as convoluted as it sounds. But that's what you get for running Wine in Windows.
Its possible, but not probable. You'll need to be able to convert the APIs being used something compatible that the PPC can compile. What about the non-code resources, i.e., languages graphics, etc.
Unless you have a team of developers to review and update the code, I think its not really feasible.
@repairedCheese So if you have QEMU emulating an x86 instance, is it possible to have WINE sitting on top to translate Windows applications to an x86-emulated, Linux-compatible environment? Could this be done in some way akin to Classic or Rosetta, where applications are integrated into the host environment and not limited to a virtual desktop client?
General question for anyone apt to answer.
General question for anyone apt to answer.
I wonder if WSL will support the i386 (32 bit) program running later? · Issue #2468 · microsoft/WSL
I just want to run arm-linux-gcc 4.4.3 :} sudo dpkg --add-architecture i386 sudo apt-get update sudo apt-get dist-upgrade sudo apt-get install g++-multilib sudo apt-get install libncurses5:i386 sud...
github.com
But yes, you can definitely make a jank, degenerate hybrid of Classic and Rosetta.
I’m just sitting here wondering when XP’s source was leaked/released (leaked?). This is the first I’ve heard of it.
A few days ago IIRC
I'd agree tbh. It's a good OS, but it's as unstable as 2000 (if not moreso) and doesn't have as many modern usability enhancements as Vista onwards. I personally use it, but it's not my old Windows OS of choice by any means if I'm given the freedom to choose something else (I really only use it because of its compatibility with what I need and also the fact that I have era-appropriate hardware).