Darwin Booting On x86 89
bjtuna writes "According to this article at the Daily Daemon News, Apple's Darwin is booting on both Intel chips AND Connectix VirtualPC under MacOS." The screenshots are available as is the original link.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Darwin Booting On x86
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
Bus error -- driver executed.
Re:it's both (Score:1)
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
Greedy corporations (Score:1)
Stupid, lousy companies, trying to maximize profits in legitimate ways. If their stock price continues to increase, I'm going to sell. I don't want all this money.
:)
-----
D. Fischer
Re:Of course... (Score:1)
PPC Die? Not likely. But just in case... (Score:1)
NeXT/OpenStep/OS X (whatever) has always been well-designed enough that it was portable.
And don't forget Apple made a fairly flawless leap across architectures from 68k to PPC.
In short: the OS can jump Hardware. No mistake about that.
But the likelihood that PPC is going to die seems slim. Even supposing demand went down for them in personal computers, their demand in the embedded and communications market is fairly high.
Re:From the FAQ... (Score:4)
Darwin is the core of MacOS X.
This is why this is such a big deal. The fact that it runs on VirtualPC without modifying that software application (unlike, say, Windows Me) means that a vast majority of x86 processors out there today can run Darwin. And if they can run Darwin, the core of MacOS X, they're much much closer to being able to run MacOS X itself.
So be happy. The open source community has just scored another coup. :-)
Re:cypherpunks (free source download) (Score:1)
Re:Broken Link (Was: Re:OSX booting on 68K!?) (Score:1)
Re:No point (Score:1)
If Darwin PPC already knows how to talk to USB and FireWire devices, isn't it just a matter of porting that stuff to Darwin x86? They're the same USB and FireWire devices being used on both platforms.
Re:PPC Die? Not likely. But just in case... (Score:1)
The rumor sites have said that Apple might consider Alpha, but it doesn't seem likely -- they have something like ten years invested in PowerPC, and the Mac community would string them up if they went Intel.
/Brian
Re:Mac86 (Score:1)
I think you're wrong there (not about hardware being their cash cow). It is because they are dependent on the hardware, that they need to move away from Motorola/IBM. Right now Apple is getting $3K for 500 Mhz machines, what could they get for GHz or dual Ghz if they could use P3s or Athlons?
Re:Of course... (Score:1)
Re:*BSD problems (Score:1)
Interesting thoughts, but a hard answer for BSD's difficulties requires further investigation. One could make a career out of the whole study of industrial design failures. In some cases, such as that of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge Disaster [bris.ac.uk], the causes are self-evident (in retrospect, anyway). In other cases, such as the problems with BSD unix, the reasons for failure are more subtle and require some digging. On the one hand, BSD had the problem with copyright violations which led to a lawsuit. But would a lawsuit be sufficient to permanently cripple the whole BSD project?
Perhaps the closest analogy in terms of industrial failures is that of the Ford Edsel [fortunecity.com]. Touted as the "car of the future", the Edsel was an unqualified flop. Yet, there wasn't anything really all that terrible about the Edsel. For whatever reasons, the public roundly rejected it. The same could be said about BSD unix. There isn't anything terribly wrong with it, but it has been pretty much rejected by the IT industry at large. Did the legal problems play a hand? Most definitely. But that doesn't explain it all.
There is no easy way to assign "x's" and "o's" to a dilemma of this sort. In the end, you might have to call it "bad luck". The public bases its choices on mysterious reasons that are beyond even the best marketing hype. Why was the public enamored with the hula hoop? Why are scooters now the latest craze? Those with the answers aren't saying. For every success, there are dozens of unheard of failures which have disappeared into obscurity. Anyone remember "Hacky Sack"? I thought so.
Re:BeOS? (Score:1)
Re:Of course... (Score:2)
As for the "chancesof OS/X on X86," Mac OS/X was originally based on NeXT/OpenSTEP and called Rhapsody. Apple made alpha releases of Rhapsody for x86 and PPC both. The kernel used to run on X86 just fine until Apple scrapped X86 development for Rhapsody and focused entirely on the PPC platform. Then they moved to the current Darwin kernel and a litte more of the X86 code went missing.
~GoRK
Too funny. (Score:1)
now let's see a massively multiplayer version... ooh.
--Perianwyr Stormcrow
Re:BeOS? (Score:1)
However, there are only about 100,000 BeOS users, according to Be. Apple ships 100,000 Macs every couple of weeks, in a slow quarter. How can Be really compete with Apple in this case? Many people would tell you "open source", but Mac OS X is even more open source than BeOS. Darwin is running on x86 as of today, thanks to that.
As far as technology, once you get past the file system, and the fact that you can build your own BeOS box out of carefully-selected generic PC hardware, then you run out of reasons to recommend BeOS over Mac OS X. Mac OS X supports more tech "buzzwords" than BeOS (things like Java2 and WebDAV), is more open source, runs more apps (even without Classic), and will have more users sometime around the middle of next week. Mac OS X is already being preinstalled by Apple as an option on G4 machines, and BeOS hasn't shipped preinstalled for years.
Be made a lot of noise a few years ago because both Windows and Mac OS were stuck in ruts. R4 looked pretty good in many ways against Windows 98 and even NT 4, which lacked an astonishing number of things itself. The whole Copland/Gershwin/Rhapsody thing almost took Apple out of the picture entirely. Be seemed to be the only one with any forward momentum at that point in the race for a "modern OS". Since then, though, Linux, Windows 2000, and Mac OS X have each become impressive realities, and BeOS hasn't changed all that much, except to become BeIA.
> Do the benchmark, and publish the result.
Benchmark what? Digital video editing? Pro-level Web design? Browsing the Web with JavaScript, HTML 4.0, CSS 1.0, Flash, Shockwave, and QuickTime? Serving Web pages over TCP/IP? Rendering with OpenGL? Running Java 2 apps? Porting software from Mac OS Classic, BSD, OpenStep? These are the things Apple is designing Mac OS X to do quickly and easily, but you just plain can't do these things with BeOS. Maybe you just want to see a comparison of how fast you can copy 1000 files from one volume to another? Well
Once again, good luck with BeOS. What it does, it does well, and it makes people happy and productive. Why pretend that it's something that it's not, though? That just works against it in the long run.
Re:what about VPC2? (Score:1)
Man, it's fun to play with
Re:Slow performance. Sluggish. (Score:1)
> really, and they got bought) every other processor
> could die. (x86 which should, G4, ia64, sparc(64))
Except for the fact that an Alpha needs something like 70 watts and gives off a correspondingly high amount of heat. The G4 500 needs only about 11 watts, and the G3 needs only 5 or 6. PIII mobile chips are as little as 15 watts. This is not important for servers, but for fanless desktops, and mobiles, it's very important. Apple makes fanless desktops and mobiles (except the one fan in their tower machine that is primarily there for the four or five hard disks you can put in there), so Alpha's are not suitable for them at all.
Lots of people love the Alpha and think that it's only marketing that's kept it from the mainstream, but there are technical reasons as well.
Re:Mac86 (Score:3)
Right now Apple's cash cow is their hardware. And until the majority of apps are re-written to be native OS X code (a.k.a. Cocoa), as opposed to "optimized MacOS Classic code" (a.k.a. Carbon), you won't see any public push from Apple to get OS X running on Intel. I'll bet they're working on it, but way, way, way behind the scenes, in case Motorola can't deliver the faster G4s like they said they could. (IBM can do it, but the G4 is Mot's baby, and they're the ones saying "no".)
If Apple would release OS X for X86 before the apps are fully ramped up and Apple has licensing in place with PC vendors, it would be a disaster. The bottom would fall out of Apple's hardware sales, the apps wouldn't be there to make the masses switch platforms (especially corporate clients), and Apple would last about 6 months.
I say they'll keep churning along like they're doing now with PPC hardware, wait a couple years until all the major apps are OS X native, then strike up an OS X for x86 licensing deal with clone manufacturers. Assuming the current clock speed hurdles for the PPC chip are overcome, Apple will retain the "high end" with the PPC, and let clone manufacturers churn out the low-end. Why? Apple will always want to "make the whole widget". And I for one think they should.
---
Re:Wow... a *BSD ported to x86, that's impressive. (Score:1)
Really? Can you get full unrestricted access to the complete code base of MacOSX? What license is it under? you don't have to do one of those cheesy as "web form registor for free" crap do you?
Re:lilo and the screenshot (Score:2)
Yes, it does. In fact, the reports of Darwin running on Intel mention using LILO to load it.
Re:Slow performance. Sluggish. (Score:3)
Hrm (Score:1)
Seeing as Darwin is based on NeXT/OpenSTEP which was used on *BOTH PPC AND X86* there really wasnt a lot of legwork involved in making Darwin work on X86 (especially since apple did it three years ago anyway)... i would have guessed that a bunch of macheads would do it though -- even though there's really nothing special about the Darwin kernel compared to any other variety of BSD that runs on X86.
~GoRK
Re:Wow... a *BSD ported to x86, that's impressive. (Score:2)
"...almost [as] spread as linux..." ???
Don't you mean NetBSD? [netbsd.org]
NetBSD is running on around 30 different platforms, while FreeBSD is running on i386 & Alpha.
Re:BeOS? (Score:1)
Humm did you think about this before you wrote it?
The customers are the ones with the money. BeOS is not selling very well. If they were to open up Be it might work in there favor, there is not much they can loose.
Will
Re:How to try it for yourself (Score:1)
The BSD subsystem is in the same address space as Mach, but all of Mach's interfaces are preserved. This is much faster than a user-level BSD subsystem, and it does not sacrifice the modularity of Mach's native interfaces.
More information is available here [arstechnica.com].
Re:Greedy corporations (Score:1)
I don't know why the Mac crowd bristles when PCers bitch about the price of Mac hardware. Let's face it, it is overpriced and remains that way because Apple has a monopoly position on the hardware precisely so than can overcharge on it and rake in the money for it.
I guess if I was a Macista, I'd defend overpaying too, now that I think about it.
BSD is dying (Score:1)
Re:BeOS? (Score:1)
Re:From the FAQ... (Score:1)
The main difference between successful operating systems and *BSD can be explained in terms of licenses. For example, most important Unix vendors are choosing the GPL license: SGI, SCO, HP-UX, LINUX, AIX, DEBIAN, REDHAT, etc.
Where does that leave *BSD? Good question. *BSD is the now the outside guy looking in. They assumed that the parade would follow them. But then they turned around. The parade had veered off to another course and the ring leaders were left twirling their batons to an empty crowd. Can *BSD recover? Smart money says no.
Re:BeOS? (Score:1)
Why bother with Star Office? Its almost as bloated and slow as MS Office. I've been using Gobe Productive [gobe.com] for the last while and its been great. Reads/Writes Word and Excel documents as well.
Be, Inc. has also not been spending all their resources on BeIA. They are actively developing BONE (BeOS Networking Environment) [benews.com] which is a complete rewrite of the Networking stack. Early benchmarks indicate, IIRC, about 2000% speed increase over the current stack. Seeing that it has been under development for a bit, we are anticipating a release somewhat soon.
They are also completely rewriting the hardware OpenGL implementation, an early look at it [benews.com] indicates that it completely wipes the floor with both Windows and Linux.
-Gandalf Greyhame
P.S. Kuro5hin is coming back soon! Yay!!!!
Linux is only Free if your time is worth Nothing
Slashdot Moderators: The Truth Revealed (Score:2)
last night, as i leaned over to give my natalie portman poster a tender kiss goodnight, i was psychically cast into a hypnotic trance. while entranced, my spirit guides delivered unto me the tale of the slashdot moderators. prepare to have your faith in mr. malda and moderation shaken to the core.
not long ago, rob malda was an outcast teenager. he did well in some of his classes, but was terrible with english. as is so often the tragic case today, his teachers passed him anyway, just to get rid of him. since malda had no real life, he spent much of his time on the computer (of course), and watching the public-access cable channel. it was there that malda heard of the mysterious mongolian monks.
malda was watching his favorite talk show, "elizabeth claire prophet." the guests that night were a group of monks based in mongolia. the monks described how they had been travelling to china to trade some of their cute teen daughters for natalie portman memorabilia. the monks had travelled no more than three days when they noticed a brilliant light in the daytime sky. the light grew larger. and larger. and larger. soon the sky was completely hidden, from horizon to horizon, by a giant metallic disk.
the monks were taken aboard the craft and placed under some sort of alien mind-control. there, they were given the deepest possible insights into the nature of man, the universe and god. a week later, the alien beings returned the monks to the earth and vanished forever.
the monks considered the area holy ground and constructed a new temple there, not bothering to return to their old monastery. they took their daughters as wives and began their own commune of worship, based on the teachings of the aliens. the monks practiced meditations which unleashed powerful spiritual forces within them. as the wives bore children, the community grew.
malda was intrigued by the spiritual insights received by the monks and excited by the idea of incestuous pleasures. unfortunately, the monks had no internet connection and so malda could not email them. without hesitation, malda booked a flight and left for mongolia. the plane ride was long and tiring, but his curiosity kept him driven.
after a month of searching, malda finally located the commune. initially, he, kept a safe distance, for fear of rejection. he studied the monks from afar. malda had heard stories of the monks' bizarre meditations, which gave them extaordinary powers. malda was somewhat skeptical of these stories at first, until he saw the truth first-hand.
in the week that malda studied the monks, he witnessed the breaking of every natural law. he was astonished as he watched the monks levitate, create pockets of lush weather within the commune and communicated with spirit forces. malda grew more and more excited and he devised a plan for meeting them.
malda knew the monks would respect him if he could display his own "magical" powers. he was determined to win their confidence, and he had with him all of the necessary tools. he approached the commune confidently. the monks greeted him with skepticism at the gate. malda took a deep breath and began his show.
using an aibo, a can of jolt cola and an inflatable sex doll, malda shocked the monks with his display of magical powers. the monks accepted him into the commune. malda's head was shaved and he was given a robe and a room. the monks warned malda to stay away from their daughters-wives.
the monks methodically taught malda the word of the great messengers. he learned eagerly at first, but soon grew bored with his life in the commune. malda's life was further stressed when his blow-up doll suffered a puncture-wound and became useless. a few days later, his aibo's power dried up. with no pet and no woman, malda slowly grew crazed.
malda had hit rock-bottom. his penis chafed from dry-hand masturbation and the cold, dry climate. one dark night, he snuck into the kitchen and convinced one of the daughter-wives to join him in his room. malda was quite relieved that he would finally get some female tenderness... for the first time in his life. he was so excited, he almost closed the deal prematurely.
unluckily for malda, the daughter-wife's father-husband was expecting her in bed at that particular moment. the women were expected to be with the monks at a very specific time for retirement. the monk went on a violent rampage throughout the temple, ending with malda's room. he flung open the door to behold his daughter-wife half disrobed and laying on top of malda. malda looked up at the monk and gasped. the daughter-wife giggled.
the monk unsheathed his sword and the daughter-wife was beheaded on the spot. malda kicked the unviable head away from him and jumped out of the bed. he backed himself into a corner, terrified. the monk approached him the with sword raised. just as he reached striking distance he dropped the sword and collapsed, crying for the loss of his daughter and the betrayal of his adopted son. malda was dishonorably discharged from the commune.
malda wandered into the forest and took shelter in a cave. he spent the next five days curled up in a fetal position, feeding on bat guano and insects. the bitterness and hatred consumed malda. once again, he was an outsider. he decided that this time, he would not be trampled on.
malda wandered for three days until he came upon a small village. he entered the shop of the local blacksmith and killed the iron-worker by bashing him in the head with the aibo. malda crafted himself a massive machete. he took apart the aibo and used its quality sony components to enhance the machete with a nuclear driven flaming mechanism.
malda returned to the commune. he took one last look at the peaceful community, then hit the ignition switch on his machete. the weapon screamed like a thousand tortured souls as it ignited with flame. malda then inserted the rechargeable battery from the aibo into his rectum. malda stormed the compound, beheading all of the monks and devouring their brains, thus capturing their souls into the battery in his anus.
the sky turned the color of blood and a great storm of pestilence swept over the village. malda barely escaped before the commune was decimated by the hand of god, thus purging the terrible evil that had been committed. his face stained with blood and his heart stained with the forces of evil, malda returned to the united states.
malda was crazed with power. he devised another insidious plan. he would build an army of mindless followers, which he would use to bring the world to its knees. he would use an online site for the tech-savvy elite to build this army. but he needed a way to control the chaotic masses that would come flocking to his new site. he needed his generals.
malda prowled the streets of his hometown, enticing male prostitutes with promises of cheap crack cocaine and sexual favors. once the prostitutes agreed to join malda in his basement, he would tie them up and place the aibo battery, upside down, in their rectum. he would then abuse the hapless victim with words of derision and samples of his writing.
the abuse was so severe, that the spirit of the victim would be broken and the soul of one monk would be absorbed from the battery. the resultant creature was not a man, nor a zombie. it was some pathetic monstrosity. the beaten souls of the monks were enslaved to malda's terrible evil. they depended upon his evil powers for sustenance. malda labelled his terrible, elite gaurd the "moderators."
malda's site grew quickly in popularity and the moderators enforced blandness and conformance with a heavy hand. no good army has room for an individual. the moderators are psychically connected to malda and know his word. that word is enforced on slashdot. the subtle moderations effectively warped the minds of those who visited the site and grew addicted, due to the powerful evil force exuded by its words.
today, malda sits in his office, strumming his electric guitar, waiting for his army of darkness to ripen.
thank you.
A *BSD running on x86? Amazing! (Score:2)
An Alternative choice for Apple... (Score:2)
Good forward thinking for Apple, thinking at least two years from now
Sig protection fault, restart to display sig
Of course... (Score:3)
This is like saying, "Super Mario World worked when CmdrTaco tried it on SNES9x for Linux!"
Of course it worked!
Now, it would be interesting if there were followups as to the chances of OSX for x86, etc, etc. But, why would there be? And even if there was, why would any of you Linux junkies want to go out and pay for it? Apple has always made the cash by selling the hardware too.
That's enough outta me.
BeOS? (Score:3)
I'm curious about the Be communities "feelings" about Darwin.
New Shoes! (Score:1)
From the FAQ... (Score:3)
"Most of the Darwin code is platform independent, and some of the platform-specific code includes some support for Intel processor-based systems. Darwin 1.0 has been compiled (on a PowerPC-based Macintosh system) for both Intel and PowerPC platforms, but the Intel support is very rudimentary. (For example, there's no installer, and it works only on one specific configuration.) We are working with the Darwin community to make Darwin a viable operating system for the Intel platform."
Availible? (Score:2)
It's available not "availible."
For God's sake man, buy a freakin' spell-checker...
No point (Score:2)
Is this just an exercise to see if they can do it? Or are they actually planning to market this?
lilo and the screenshot (Score:2)
The other questions probably regard to threaded TCP stacks, software emulation, and POSIX compliance -- but I'd rather talk about something lilo.
Broken Link (Was: Re:OSX booting on 68K!?) (Score:1)
The link should be: http://www.jagshouse.com/OSX.html [jagshouse.com]. Notice the addition of the "s".
This is my
Mac86 (Score:1)
Seriously, though, that would be a step in the right direction IMO. I'm a linux supporter myself, but saying it's the best OS out there is pretty naive. After all, stability and functionality, while critical, are not everything. Support is still a key factor, and while apps are (slowly) going to linux, Windows still has the most useful application.
Apple, however, has a nice compromise. It's still behind windows in applications, but not by as much, and it's much more stable. (Of course, I've still managed to crash G4's on occasion)
All that's kept me prom focusing more on apple products is the fact that the hardware is for the most part much more expensive, and AFAIK that's the only place you can run (modern version, anyway) MacOS.
Fingers crossed...
Wow... a *BSD ported to x86, that's impressive... (Score:1)
I'll admit that I am impressed that they even did it at all, being unlike Apple to even acknowledge processors that don't start with 68, 60, or the letter "G" exist, but this is more of a trailing development as far as I can tell rather than "leading the industry" as it is trying to sound like...
Re:Wow... a *BSD ported to x86, that's impressive. (Score:2)
Only Darwin is available under the Apple source license. Darwin is the MacOSX kernel, so you don't get any GUI or any of the fancy stuff. :-)
Yes you need to signup on Apple's webpage to get access, but I didn't see any cheese involved.
How to try it for yourself (Score:5)
Darwin is still in its earliest stages on x86. If you miss the early days of Linux and *BSD, you might enjoy helping get Darwin going.
If you want to try Darwin for yourself, you'll need
Once you have that hardware, you need to download two images: one for a partition of type AB [darwinfo.org] (20 KB compressed) and one for a partition of type A8 [darwinfo.org] (about 100 MB compressed). Create appropriately sized partitions on your disk (945 blocks and 920304 blocks respectively), and uncompress the images onto those partitions (I used primary partitions; extended partitions might work, too) and try to boot. You can either use lilo, or download a Darwin boot sector [darwinfo.org].
If you can boot Darwin, then you can begin to explore. If you like to hack on a new OS, or would like to see how Apple's idea of Mach (monolithic kernel) differs from that of the Hurd (microkernel), or even if you'd just like to see things done a different way (e.g., dyld vs. ld.so, netinfo vs. NIS, IOKit vs. ????, etc.), Darwin can be pretty interesting.
For more information on on Darwin, check out Darwinfo [darwinfo.org] or Apple's darwin-devel mailing list.
Re:Slow performance. Sluggish. (Score:1)
Re:BeOS? (Score:1)
Darwin is basically the bottom half of OS X, and not much different than any other BSD.
If you want to compare Darwin to something, compare it to FreeBSD, or one of the others.
BTW, BeOS is getting a new network stack that is comparable in speed as the BSDs, and also full OpenGL support. The filesystem is already multi-user capable, and works like a database.
Check out OpenTracker.org for info on Be's open-source efforts. I bet Be would open up even more code if there was some serious interest in expanding the OS beyond what it is today, possibly into the server market.
I seen a job listing on Be.com for someone to run a Server Solutions dept. at Be. I am sure they would be interested in having the experience of the Open Source community help them out on such an idea, I hope.
Troll (Score:1)
cypherpunks (free source download) (Score:1)
Excuse me.... (Score:1)
err... (Score:1)
Re:cypherpunks (free source download) (Score:1)
Good... (Score:1)
There are many reasons that a lot of Apple's market consists of graphics professionals, and the pretty UI is one of them, and it's nice to play around with one every once in a while. I say, its about time.
Re:How to try it for yourself (Score:2)
Re:hemos is a newbie to bsd stories (Score:2)
GPL: Freedom with provisos.
Re:Slow performance. Sluggish. (Score:1)
Multiple processors is not about running the same stuff faster, it's about running MORE at the same speed.
Re:Um (Score:1)
I personally would give him a 5: Funny.
Re:From the FAQ... (Score:1)
Okay, this makes me fume. If you are reading this comment, and the parent comment, DON'T ACCEPT IT BLINDLY. If you don't know, investigate the licenses yourself. If you do know, you're already aware that this is bullshit.
Succesfull projects love BSD style licenses. Look at Apache. Commercial vendors prefer BSD style to GPL since it allows them more flexibility. GO BSD (Style Licenses)!
wp14: You may be right about where BSD is now, but the license premise is flawed.
Re:Wow... a *BSD ported to x86, that's impressive. (Score:1)
Don't you mean NetBSD?
NetBSD is running on around 30 different platforms, while FreeBSD is running on i386 & Alpha
No kidding. "Almost as spread as Linux."
Can you say narrowminded ?
Re:How to try it for yourself (Score:1)
The Hurd uses a Mach microkernel. Darwin uses Mach, but not as a microkernel (just like NEXTSTEP and OpenStep before it). Go read about it [apple.com].
If it were just FreeBSD on Mach, you might have a point, but it isn't. Take a look at how drivers are written using IOKit, dyld, netinfo, the vm subsystem, the unified buffer cache, etc. for just a few of the many differences.
Mach is ``notoriously slow'' when core functionality is implemented as user-space servers. Performance is why Darwin puts this core code in kernel space.
Re:How to try it for yourself (Score:2)
PS> And I'm pissed at Ars Technica (normally a good supporter of BeOS) for neglecting to mention that BeOS (QNX too) runs the servers in user-space. That comment about
"Most modern desktop and server operating systems" was needlessly exclusionary. Of course, maybe I'm just being anal.
Re:what about VPC2? (Score:1)
Yeah, with OS X just around the corner I have no incentive to upgrade to VPC3 at this time. I got VPC2 free when I bought this G3. I'm looking forward to running OS X on it within 6 months, and hope that Connectix has an OS X native version of VPC for me to upgrade to at that time.
Re:BeOS? (Score:1)
However, I must agree that performance on Mac OS X is still a major issue. Most applications ported to OS X are still, for the most part, a Classic Mac OS application that have simply got rid of several deprecated calls. This doesn't mean that they've been properly optimized. Most still use event managing software that's been around since the early 1990s. Instead of doing like a proper un*x app would and sleeping when it's not needed, these keep checking to see if they're needed [WaitNextEvent, for you Mac-programmer wireheads]. Apple has been trying to get people to move to the more processor-friendly carbon events, but it's (to use a buzzword) a major paradigm shift for your Mac programmer...instead of constantly asking the OS "Yeah, did I get any new events?" and then handling said event, now the OS tells the application "Hey, look alive, there's an event waiting for you."
I see a lot of promise in OS X, but it's going to need the programmers support to make it work well.
Darwin and MkLinux (Score:1)
The pretty-much-dead MkLinux project was a Linux personality running on a Mach kernel.
Would it be possible to move the MkLinux stuff over to the Darwin kernel? Seems to me that might open up many more possibilities for Darwin, as there's more software and expertise for Linux than Darwin around so far...
Re:From the FAQ... (Score:1)
With GPL'd code (like the Linux Kernel) I couldn't do anything to make money from the code (because any/all changes I did would have to return to the core Linux Kernel group...
The bottom line is that BSD's are better for "the bottom line" (think Solaris and the CDE [ created from the BSD'd X Windows ] and what its done for Solaris).
Re:PPC Die? [Apple had backup plans for AltiVec] (Score:1)
http://www5.zdnet.com/zdnn /content/mcwo/0602/mcwo0006.html [zdnet.com]
According to Morgenstern, it was actually announced by Apple in some fashion (I tried searching:
http://www.apple.com [apple.com]
and
http://developer.apple.com [apple.com]
for "trimedia", but they're not working right now)
Then, of course, AltiVec (nee VMX) hit the scene and TriMedia phaded :) into the background.
OSX booting on 68K!? (Score:1)
I didn't submit this one to the stories que, I figure they will check sources on my submissions from now on.
Re:Of course... (Score:1)
Missed the important part (Score:2)
Re:Wow... a *BSD ported to x86, that's impressive. (Score:2)
The cool part is that Apple didn't do this port, community volunteers did! Lots of great work by Naoki Hamada, hacking away in Japan, and tons of other participants. This is a demonstration of the strength of the open source approach. Don't let your anti-Apple bias blur the message here.
Jason
what about VPC2? (Score:1)
I think this really says something about the quality that Connectix is putting out. To emulate x86 that well is pretty amazing. Throw any old x86-based OS on VPC and it just works. That's cool.
Does anyone have more information on this? It's mentioned that the disk image is for VPC3. Is it possible to get this running on VPC2? Maybe I'll have to install another copy of VPC2 (I've got one running Win95) and try this myself.
Re:Of course... (Score:2)
As usual, it's clear nobody follows links.
If you did, you'd find a link to this image [psychicfriends.net] and nothing much else, except a link to DarwInfo [darwinfo.org] which links back to this same story on
Amusing, but irritating. Especially because of all the attention.
Mong.
*
Moderators Suck (Score:1)
you don't understand. (Score:2)
even on intel. we used virtual pc to fix up the
botstrap code, and then used the images from virtualpc to make a *real* intel machine boot.
the news is, "darwin intel finally boots!", not "it works on virtal pc, too".
BSD CSRG is dead (Score:1)
P.S. learn the correct spelling of ``Berkley'', Einstein. After all, you claim to be a ``developer of UNIX''. Yeah, right.
Re:How to try it for yourself (Score:4)
This all makes me wonder. FreeBSD runs on x86, then Apple comes along and ports it to the PPC. Then they release it as open source and a bunch of hackers start porting it to the x86. Is there really an advantage to having a BSD running on mach? Especially since mach is notoriously slow. Why?
Re:Wow... a *BSD ported to x86, that's impressive. (Score:1)
I'll assume you meant NetBSD rather than FreeBSD. Oh and btw...NetBSD currently runs on 29 different architectures. Linux is about 10 less. Go troll somewhere else little boy.
Re:*BSD problems (Score:1)
BSD is arguably one of the most successful Unix, especially when considering its influence. Learn some history. Or even better, just grow up. The Linux vs BSD war is over, and everybody is winning. Even mindless zealots like you.
Re:BSDi troubles (Score:1)
Re:hemos is a newbie to bsd stories (Score:2)
And how exactly did FreeBSD get ripped off? How come you GNUzis always yell when some says that "software piracy", yet turn around and accuse corporations of "stealing" free software?
It's a sorry state of affairs when those most gung-ho on free software seem to have forgotten what it's all about: sharing.
Re:*BSD problems (Score:1)
Yet it doesn't matter. People like choices. After having chosen Linux which illuminates quite positively many tend to be reilluminated about the powers of *BSD.
*BSD is not for everyone, and this is also one of its many forces.
I recommend you not to think strictly business like analytical as in the world of technology evolution.. what seems wrong in the present has a striking history of becoming a long time success.
Re:BeOS? (Score:1)
hemos is a newbie to bsd stories (Score:1)
Everyone already knows that Darwin works on x86. And everyone also knows that this has absolutely no impact on Apple's business plan, and does not mean that OS X will run x86. It's also irrelevant because there [openbsd.org] are [netbsd.org] several [freebsd.org] BSD-based systems which are much more worthy of x86 PC users' time.
Let's run through more facts that everyone should know. This has nothing to do with GNU/Linux or the GPL. It does not mean that Photoshop will work on FreeBSD. It doesn't mean that the Free Unix community will see an outpouring of money, code, or other support from Apple. All it means is that Apple decided to, for once, release a real operating system. They lack the talent to do so, as should be evident from MacOS 1 through 9. They found an excellent codebase, which, do to the wonderful BSD license, is essentially free (as in both pro bono and libre) for them to plunder however they wish. So they take twenty years of the best operating systems code ever written and, um, "embrace and extend" it with the GUI that Jobs brought with him from NeXT. Very "innovative". They then release this code, which allows Mac lusers run Photoshop without crashing, and allows them to get very rich with very little work.
Years of hard work and research from many real computer professionals associated with several projects across the country and around the world go to buy Mr. Jobs another few houses (hice?) and cars. Yay.
(And this, my friends, is flamebait. I love Fridays.)
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
Oh yes there is a point!!! Re:No point (Score:2)
Re:Of course... (Score:1)
Re:Mac86 (Score:1)
I have usability issues with the UI, but these are primarily personal prefence and not design issues.
The big stumbler for x86 OSX is Apple's greed -- they don't want to lose the margins on their hardware.
x86 OSX application availability would be an issue, too, I presume, but if there was enough demand, maybe we'd get superfat binaries that could run on either platform..
it's both (Score:1)
It's in the BSD section, obviously, but since Darwin is the "Apple brand" of BSD the topic is Apple. Both are applicable.
WTF?! The first mention on slashdot ? (Score:1)
All of the source I have seen for each Darwin package has ProjectBuilder makefiles, so I assume it will build under OPENSTEP properly. If this is true, then it just *MIGHT* also build under Project Center for GNUstep..
Also, much of it is packaged as a Debian dpkg!