| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Apple Keeps x86 Torch Lit with 'Marklar' | |
|
||
| Time: 19:24 EST/00:24 GMT | News Source: eWeek | Posted By: Todd Richardson | ||
|
Thanks Jade. As Apple Computer Inc. draws up its game plan for the CPUs that will power its future generations of Mac hardware, the company is holding an ace in the hole: a feature-complete version of Mac OS X running atop the x86 architecture. According to sources, the Cupertino, Calif., Mac maker has been working steadily on maintaining current, PC-compatible builds of its Unix-based OS. The project (code-named Marklar, a reference to the race of aliens on the "South Park" cartoons) has been ongoing inside Apple since the early days of its transition to the Unix-based Mac OS X in the late '90s. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 303 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:43:48 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 665 (64.126.91.172) at 8/31/2002 7:28:09 PM |
| I hope they do release this soon! I don't think I would use it as my main OS, but I would sure love to try it out without having to buy all new hardware. |
| #2 By 2332 (165.247.4.124) at 8/31/2002 9:02:39 PM |
|
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: If Apple is going to survive in the long run, they NEED to become a software company.
They write some good stuff... it's their strength, and they should stick with it. Mac OS could be a REAL competitor to WinXP on PCs... |
| #3 By 3653 (65.190.70.73) at 9/1/2002 12:06:32 AM |
|
Stubear is actually on to something. Apple makes their money (revenue, profit) off of HARDWARE. They would be FOOLS to cannibalize that business, which is exactly what would happen if they ever offered their OS on much cheaper pc hardware.
Apple isn't in the enviable position to have "other" sources of revenue from software... like a big office suite, two dozen server apps, etc like Microsoft. Apple DEPENDS on their hardware sales far too much (even more than poor Sun) to consider a high risk move like offering their OS on standard pc hardware. On that point, I agree with g33kb0y... that they might (highly unlikely still) go to pc-like hardware... but not standard pc hardware. |
| #4 By 2960 (68.100.157.191) at 9/1/2002 12:21:20 AM |
|
I've been telling people for over a year they had to have something like this locked away in a deep dark secret dungeon in Cupertino, but no one, especially the die-hard Mac folks didn't want to believe me.
It only made sense... I wonder if this story is Apple's version of a 'trial balloon' to see what the reaction would be ? TL |
| #5 By 2960 (68.100.157.191) at 9/1/2002 12:23:30 AM |
|
Stubear,
At least for now, I'd have to agree. While we may one day see MacOS X running on x86, it will be for APPLE's benefit and to solve it's current Motorola problem, not for the benifit of the PC industy. It could help indirectly, though. A move to x86 would (should) allow the use of more industry common components and thus much lower system costs. TL |
| #6 By 1989 (24.159.230.34) at 9/1/2002 12:54:57 AM |
|
Just in case someone wanted Darwin for x86:
http://www.opensource.apple.com/projects/darwin/1.4/release.html |
| #7 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/1/2002 2:46:03 AM |
| Shouldn't that be l8r ? |
| #8 By 5444 (208.180.245.190) at 9/1/2002 11:57:25 AM |
|
Stubear.
and for good reasons. the X86 architecture sucks. A good example of a bad design that wins out over a good design because of political decisions at a company and not sound engineering decisions. El. |
| #9 By 2332 (165.247.6.158) at 9/1/2002 12:25:03 PM |
|
#18 - It might suck, but it's still a lot faster than the "better designed" RISC platform. RISC vs CISC is a funny argument, because the RISC crowd has their argument based in theory, and the CISC crowd has their argument based in real world tests.
#8 - the only reason Apple doesn't make money off of their software is because THEY HAVEN'T TRIED. They've only tried to make money via their hardware, and consequently, they won't sell much software since their big software product - the OS - comes with all their machines. Couple that with their extremely small user base, and you have a recipe for failure. Microsoft learned long ago that they way you make money isn't with hardware, it's with software. As many of you have mentioned, Microsoft's profit margins are well about 90%, where Apple's are in the single digits. In addition, I'm willing to bet that Apple really wouldn't loose a whole lot of their existing hardware market share by offering OSX to PC users. Why? Well, most people that use Macs use Macs because they're loyal to Apple. It was their first computer, or they grew up with it, or whatever. Also, with only 3% market share as it is, they're are all that many users who COULD move at this point... Apple could only stand to gain significant revenue at this point. Eventually, they could package PCs with OSX, and sell them themselves. With their growing PC user base, they might just make it. #5 - The thing that blocks them from gaining marketshare is the fact their machines are typically more expensive than PCs, and because everybody else on the planet uses PCs. If they developed a solid x86 OSX version, made it very compatible with PCs, and sold if for 100 bucks a pop (and, of course, got companies like Dell to sign on), they would gain market share VERY fast... OSX is pretty, and people like pretty. |
| #10 By 3653 (65.190.70.73) at 9/1/2002 6:20:54 PM |
| #19... "people like pretty". Yes, SOME people do... and that is Apple's 3%. The word "pretty" never comes up in a corporate environment... where the real money is made. |
| #11 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/1/2002 8:40:15 PM |
| #21 Since when is OpenOffice.org (I hate that name) fully compatible with Microsoft Office? |
| #12 By 8589 (65.100.120.159) at 9/1/2002 9:56:34 PM |
| BobSmith, download OpenOffice for Linux, or if you are only a Windows user, download the Windows version. Now run OpenOffice and load a Microsoft Office document with it. Voila ... it works. |
| #13 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 9/1/2002 10:51:21 PM |
| Funny my macros didn't seem to open to well in OpenOffice.org. Oh, and I could seem to open and modify my access databases. I also wasn't able to open my calendar, contacts, email, or notes. It seems the OpenOffice.org is missing a little funtionality that Microsoft Office has. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 303 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:43:48 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
