MAC OS X on PC it may come sooner than you think!!!!

[Gamer]

I picked up this link from The Different District the new story is from the MAC Daily News and is very inreresting you should view it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.macdailynews.com/opinion_comments.php?id=P2274_0_2_0_C

 

[trpnmonkey41]

that says nothing about it even being in production it just says that apple would be wise to do it.

only problem is apple probably would not want to switch their programers to x86 architecture and most pc manufacturers would not want to switch to apple

 

[ApplejustWorks]

certainly hope that doesnt happen!

 

[MacAddikt]

apple makes most of their money on hardware. only recently have they started making money on software with their professional video editing suite. but still, they make their OS to help sell more computers. they give away iTunes for windows, to help sell iPods. etc.

 

[rman]

As MacAddikt said, if Apple created OS X for the PC, then they would lose thier hardware sales.

 

[ApplejustWorks]

.....

Yes, but making OS X for the Pc would make our Macs less special(they'd still be 10 times better) but still not as special

 

[lugee]

Don't think it will happen any time soon, plus i'm praying that it never happens.

 

[natey]

Hum, actually, I've heard that Windows is going to go away from the x86 arc. They'll be updating there chips (they have to to keep up). Also, I've heard that Windows will have more of a unix-based operating system, like Mac, and Linux does.

Also, IBM is making the power PC chips for Macs (Moterolla did before).

With x86 chips, it's hard to make them go any "faster." Well, they can go faster, but they produce more heat. They aren't effient enough. Plus, they are only 32 bit chips. AMD has come out with 64 bit chips, I don't know exactly how their chips are working, but I heard that it's not x86 , rather, it's compatable with x86 code (it's translating somewhere). apperently the AMD 64 chip has a 32 bit channel and 64 bit channel. With windows, however, hardly any programs use 64 bit (yet). the newer windows (longhorn) is supposed to be albe to use the 64 bits, and it wont be useing x86 anymore.

What does that mean?

It's possible in 2-5 years that Mac, Windows, Linux and other unix based systems will be fully cross-platformable.

I wonder if the new virtual PC for windows will be a preview of windows Unix-based machine.

As for windows users -- they'll have upgrade (again), because newer programs are already being made for the newer windows. And that issue is another ball game. Getting everyone to get new computers will be a challange. I understand that they'll gradually intoduce things as they go along. Building up on the Longhorn code (which is different then the old windows-based programming).

Anyway, that's what I hear.

And Mac users? You're already ahead in the game.

--nate

 

[Graphite]

Right. Kinda... but its all old news what you said.

For this junk about Mac OSX on PC.. listen to your Mac Addikt Elder. I agree with him.

 

[Ray]

apple makes most of their money on hardware. only recently have they started making money on software with their professional video editing suite. but still, they make their OS to help sell more computers. they give away iTunes for windows, to help sell iPods. etc.

... which also allows them to make an operating system as good as OS X but only charge $99 for a full license!!

I agree I would like to see OS X on a PC. Because I have a desktop PC back home. Would it run as well? Probably not. The RISC based processors Apple uses has a lot to do with OS X's speed and appeal. They would be re-inventing the wheel with something that "looks like" OS X.

Last I heard, Apple has a few developers working on OS X for the PC (five is the rumor I heard). But I think that amounts to Darwin on x86. Which, if you have tried it ... is not quite to the 'useful' stage just yet. That is not including the actual interface (Aqua). And it's the interface that we all love. Otherwise, you should just install the latest copy of OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD, etc.

-Ray

 

[wiggin1605]

lol check it out!

Lol check it out people there is a preview of Longhorn out an it looks almost exactly like OS X the web browser looks almost exactly like Safari. http://www.flexbeta.net/main/articles.php?action=show&id=40 Can't Microsoft do any thing except copy Apple its so pathetic an this thing doesnt come out till like 2006 Apple will have like three more OS out by then we will be at 10.6.

 

[wiggin1605]

Well...

ok mabey it looks like a mix of all three major operating systems Window Linux And OS X. But they are still copying every one else.

 

[TylerMoney]

I think apple dislikes windows too much to allow a version of os x on the pc. Plus..they're just now getting more people to buy both their hardware and software. They have potential to be really big again. It would be just about the worst time possible to allow something like this to happen. They know this, and I don't think they're going to kill their company.

 

[StarManta]

There already is a version of OS X on PC! But it's buggy, slow, and several years behind on features. Better known as Windows....

 

[Graphite]

I think apple dislikes windows too much to allow a version of os x on the pc. Plus..they're just now getting more people to buy both their hardware and software. They have potential to be really big again. It would be just about the worst time possible to allow something like this to happen. They know this, and I don't think they're going to kill their company.

I think apple could careless about where their os goes, as long as it gets them more $.

What would be god of OSes is if Mac OSX became able to run PC applications native. But the OS would not be able to be run on anything but a mac...

 

[JCLW]

First post here

Sorry, but it's going to be a bit of a ramble...

x86 is at the end of its life. It was introduced as an 8bit architecture back in 1978 with the intel 8086. It was "expanded" to 16bits for the 80286, 32bits for the 80386DX, and now AMD has pushed it to 64bits with the AMD64. So currently x86 is nothing more then a 64bit hack of a 32 bit hack of a 16bit hack of a 25 year old architecture. intel would like to go with their IA64 architecture (more towards the RISC side of things) but there is a huge resistence to switch architectures in the wintel user base, mostly because new architectures tend to run legacy software slower then the older architecture.

Due to licencing deals with intel, AMD needs to keep x86 around as long as they can, which will only hurt the wintel industry in the long run.

MS knows that x86 won't last for ever - their Xbox 2 will be built around dual PowerPC cores. Which means that they will have Longhorn ported to PowerPC. This isn't anything new for them as both NT 3 and NT 4 were ported to IBM PowerPC, even 'tho NT 5 (Win2000/XP) was not.