Right now I'm trying to get a copy of OS X to try it. Anyone else do this yet?
EDIT: Using PearPC: http://pearpc.sourceforge.net/
EDIT: Using PearPC: http://pearpc.sourceforge.net/
Has anyone run OS X on a PC here?
- Thread starter RockGuitarDude
- Start date
Nothinman
Elite Member
- Sep 14, 2001
- 30,672
- 0
- 0
It's the "other than" part that's funny. FreeBSD is nothing like OS X from almost any perspective, the only thing that's the same is the base CLI userland tools, the drivers are all the different, the kernel is completely different, the UI is completely different, the filesystem layout is completely different. Hell Windows+Cygwin is probably just as close to OS X as FreeBSD is.
Probably.
Anyway, to the OP, I wouldn't waste my money on that OSX disc. It's not going to do anything for you.
I thought XNU(?) loaded the FreeBSD kernel or something when it loaded.
It's complicated.I'd agree that FreeBSD isn't OS X, but it's a hell of a lot closer than Windows + Cygwin.
I think most of us figured that out. But you didn't specify which platform, so I figured my PPC computers would count.
Get a Mac Mini.
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
I thought XNU(?) loaded the FreeBSD kernel or something when it loaded.
I'd agree that FreeBSD isn't OS X, but it's a hell of a lot closer than Windows + Cygwin.
Actually, XNU ("X is Not Unix", or so I've heard) is sort of a mish-mash of BSD, Mach, IOKit, and some other stuff. FreeBSD is the Unix part, but the other stuff is what really makes OS X.
OS X is Unix.
Or close enough to be, yet not step on any trademark toes.
Without BSD (in the form of Darwin) OS X would be nothing. Even the aqua interface is partially Unix-based stuff. OpenGL is originally from Unix-land, as is the OpenStep API that they used as a basis for Carbon. And most of the subsystems are BSD/Unix/Linux derived. There printing subsystem since 10.2.something is "CUPS", which is the same setup that most Linux distros use.
Years and years Apple has been trying to get a successfull Unix OS off of the ground, it wasn't until they gave up their weird attitude and embraced free software they couldn't pull it off. To bad they don't open it up more like Sun is claiming they will solaris, it has real possiblities as a world class OS, but that is about likely as them selling ports to x86.
Or close enough to be, yet not step on any trademark toes.
Without BSD (in the form of Darwin) OS X would be nothing. Even the aqua interface is partially Unix-based stuff. OpenGL is originally from Unix-land, as is the OpenStep API that they used as a basis for Carbon. And most of the subsystems are BSD/Unix/Linux derived. There printing subsystem since 10.2.something is "CUPS", which is the same setup that most Linux distros use.
Years and years Apple has been trying to get a successfull Unix OS off of the ground, it wasn't until they gave up their weird attitude and embraced free software they couldn't pull it off. To bad they don't open it up more like Sun is claiming they will solaris, it has real possiblities as a world class OS, but that is about likely as them selling ports to x86.
Originally posted by: RockGuitarDude
nah... PearPC is free
I just want to learn the OS
And spend $130 in the process? If you're spending money, you might as well get decent performance at the same time.
Wow. Where do I begin...
No.
Wrong. The Carbon API is an updated version of the classic Mac OS 9 API. OpenStep was the last version of the NEXTSTEP frameworks developed by NeXT. When Apple bought NeXT in 1997, OpenStep got turned into Cocoa (by way of yellowbox).
Except for drivers, graphics, sound, filesystem, etc.
Only after Copland failed (I'm not counting A/UX). And even then they could have gone with Be.
No.
Wrong. The Carbon API is an updated version of the classic Mac OS 9 API. OpenStep was the last version of the NEXTSTEP frameworks developed by NeXT. When Apple bought NeXT in 1997, OpenStep got turned into Cocoa (by way of yellowbox).
Except for drivers, graphics, sound, filesystem, etc.
Only after Copland failed (I'm not counting A/UX). And even then they could have gone with Be.
Originally posted by: drag
OS X is Unix.
Or close enough to be, yet not step on any trademark toes.
Without BSD (in the form of Darwin) OS X would be nothing. Even the aqua interface is partially Unix-based stuff. OpenGL is originally from Unix-land, as is the OpenStep API that they used as a basis for Carbon. And most of the subsystems are BSD/Unix/Linux derived. There printing subsystem since 10.2.something is "CUPS", which is the same setup that most Linux distros use.
Years and years Apple has been trying to get a successfull Unix OS off of the ground, it wasn't until they gave up their weird attitude and embraced free software they couldn't pull it off. To bad they don't open it up more like Sun is claiming they will solaris, it has real possiblities as a world class OS, but that is about likely as them selling ports to x86.
Darwin is open.
Yes.
Your right. I ment to say Cocoa. Not carbon. My mistake.
Sound and graphics I could care less. The filesystem is HFS+, which is from Mac OS stuff, but for stuff like journalling capabilities, file handling, etc, is based on virtual file system technology taken from BSD.[q/]
Only after Copland failed (I'm not counting A/UX). And even then they could have gone with Be.[/quote]
There is a reason why they wanted Unix, and they were working on it ever since they aquired NextStep in the Jobs reacquisition.
Such as...?
That's not exactly "most of" now is it? And whether you care about or not, drawing stuff on the screen is a major part of any modern desktop OS.
Graphics is based on OpenGL framework, which is Unix-derived. From SGI specificly if your curious.
Filesystem is BSD-derived. HFS+ may be MacOS, but it has most of the apsects of a Unix file system thru the VFS stuff that gives it good characteristics such as lack of fragmentation. Without VFS modernizing HFS+ with features like journalling would of never been possible. That VFS stuff is 100% BSD. It forms the basis for Volfs, which provides the dual aspect between the MacOS-style file handling of volumeidirectory:filename and the Unix /directory/filename style.
Coccoa is Unix-derived thru NextStep and freinds and is mostly compatable with other OpenSTEP API derived setups like GNUStep. OpenStep is a programming API. A standard created for unix operating systems based on the original NextStep Unix user interface.
Printing subsystem is CUPS, which is Common Unix Printing System. OS X originally had a propriatory printing system specificly made for it, which Apple abandoned in favor of a unix standard.
The networking is BSD.
edit: Most networking services are Unix/Linux/BSD.
the file directory system is Unix-based. Your home directory, your /dev directory. All of it. The way it mounts file systems...
Developement tools are GNU and BSD.
The kernel is a combination of a obsolete microkernel and BSD kernel.
Without Unix, without BSD, without Free software OS X would be nothing.
Filesystem is BSD-derived. HFS+ may be MacOS, but it has most of the apsects of a Unix file system thru the VFS stuff that gives it good characteristics such as lack of fragmentation. Without VFS modernizing HFS+ with features like journalling would of never been possible. That VFS stuff is 100% BSD. It forms the basis for Volfs, which provides the dual aspect between the MacOS-style file handling of volumeid
irectory:filename and the Unix /directory/filename style.Coccoa is Unix-derived thru NextStep and freinds and is mostly compatable with other OpenSTEP API derived setups like GNUStep. OpenStep is a programming API. A standard created for unix operating systems based on the original NextStep Unix user interface.
Printing subsystem is CUPS, which is Common Unix Printing System. OS X originally had a propriatory printing system specificly made for it, which Apple abandoned in favor of a unix standard.
The networking is BSD.
edit: Most networking services are Unix/Linux/BSD.
the file directory system is Unix-based. Your home directory, your /dev directory. All of it. The way it mounts file systems...
Developement tools are GNU and BSD.
The kernel is a combination of a obsolete microkernel and BSD kernel.
Without Unix, without BSD, without Free software OS X would be nothing.
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: drag
OS X is Unix.
Or close enough to be, yet not step on any trademark toes.
Without BSD (in the form of Darwin) OS X would be nothing. Even the aqua interface is partially Unix-based stuff. OpenGL is originally from Unix-land, as is the OpenStep API that they used as a basis for Carbon. And most of the subsystems are BSD/Unix/Linux derived. There printing subsystem since 10.2.something is "CUPS", which is the same setup that most Linux distros use.
Years and years Apple has been trying to get a successfull Unix OS off of the ground, it wasn't until they gave up their weird attitude and embraced free software they couldn't pull it off. To bad they don't open it up more like Sun is claiming they will solaris, it has real possiblities as a world class OS, but that is about likely as them selling ports to x86.
Darwin is open.
Well at least they got that much right.
Only the 3D stuff (and it's not like there were any other feasible choices); and GL runs on things are are not unix. The 2D stuff (Quartz) is Apple.
NEXTSTEP never had any friends.
And I'm not sure what makes OpenStep. "Unix-derived". It was operating system independent (it ran on Windows NT). And it wasn't based on the UI; it was based on the NEXTSTEP frameworks (Application Kit and Foundation Kit).What makes my home directory "unix-based"?
That Apple has heavily customized.
How is Mach obsolete?
It's not a secret that Apple uses Free software. But to say that OS X would be "nothing" without it is disingenuous. The stuff that makes OS X OS X and not another unix are all Apple designed.
I do not know for certain, but the entire display is OpenGL accelerated. Even the 2d portions. (think Quartz Extreme, or Extreme Quartz or whatever.)
A similar thing is TCP/IP. The fisrt protocol stack was developed by BSD developers, and it's code was heavily modified and used in NT Windows, but that doesn't erase it's origins.
Although I do acknowledge that it is a stretch to think of OpenGL as such.
NEXTSTEP never had any friends.
And I'm not sure what makes OpenStep. "Unix-derived". It was operating system independent (it ran on Windows NT). And it wasn't based on the UI; it was based on the NEXTSTEP frameworks (Application Kit and Foundation Kit).[/quote]Because Nextstep was a Unix OS and they are the ones that created it which later formed the framework for the OpenStep API. Which makes it unix-derived.
What makes my home directory "unix-based"?[/quote]
how the behavior of the OS interacts with it.
For instance the permissions on the filing system is Unix. Read/Write/Execute with the User Group World permissions model is Unix. They behavior of the user configurations being stored in your home directory and the lack of ability for users (besides administrators) to affect files outside that is the same as what people use in Linux and BSD operating systems.
There are a few differences like the directory is named "users" instead of "home" and configurations are stored in a directory instead a bunch of .filename and .directoryname files. But the concepts are fundamentally the same.
This is different from... say how OS 9 did things and how Windows does things.
That Apple has heavily customized.[/quote]
Sort of, and that still doesn't erase the fact that they are designed for Unix-like OSes or that for the most part they are free software.
Yes... Even apple uses software that was written by Richard Stallman of RMS/GNU/FSF fame himself. Kinda funny?
And don't worry, Apple's patches to GCC benifit me (and IBM, and visa versa) when I use Ubuntu on my Ibook.
How is Mach obsolete?[/quote]
The microkernel design, while having interesting academic and theoretical benifits was a flop in the real world. While NT and Apple like to say that they are using Microkernels because it's sexy for tech geeks, the kernels they are using are about as microkernel as Linux with all of it's modules is.
And if that isn't enough for your to have it declared "obsolete". XNU is a combination of Mach 3.0 and BSD kernels...
The BSD kernel from which it was derived (FreeBSD, was it?), is still undergoing vigorious and active developement. Mach kernel and OS had all of it's active development halted in 1994. It's code base is older then Win95's is.
[/quote]
It's not a secret that Apple uses Free software. But to say that OS X would be "nothing" without it is disingenuous. The stuff that makes OS X OS X and not another unix are all Apple designed.[/quote]
I am not dogging on Apple or OS X or anything like that. It's a fine OS.
But if you take away all the non-Unix portions of OS X out you have Darwin + numerious half-their libraries and subsystems, if you take all the Unix portions out of OS X you have pretty much a lump of fairly worthless code. It's the combination of the two that makes OS X, well, OS X.
I like it. I like Linux better, but OS X could be something very wonderfull if Apple would loosen up a bit. Of course if that would make Apple more money or not, I don't know.
i installed OS X via pearpc. it worked okay. this was on a pentium 4 2.2GHz with 1 gig of RAM. it was a bit sluggish, but it worked.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter