🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1gy5it6.4ogqp01vfz4kpN%spam@husumtoften.invalid>,
 spam@husumtoften.invalid (Per R�nne) wrote:

> How much will Apple have to change the operating system in order to let
> MacOS X and MacOS Classic {68K emulation including} run on an Intel
> processor?
> 
> Remember that MacOS has always run in big-endian mode and that Intel has
> always run in little-endian mode. MacOS would have to emulate
> big-endianness for old programs just as VirtualPC for G5 has to emulate
> litte-endianness on the G5 {earlier PowerPCs could run both ways}.

Per, it is at this point not a matter of having to change anything, they 
already have. Every version of OS X has been developed in parallel for 
Intel. Classic will apparently not be supported any longer.

Bjorn Olsson d.� <bjorn@justingenstans.com> wrote:

> In article <1gy5it6.4ogqp01vfz4kpN%spam@husumtoften.invalid>,
>  spam@husumtoften.invalid (Per R�nne) wrote:

> > How much will Apple have to change the operating system in order to let
> > MacOS X and MacOS Classic {68K emulation including} run on an Intel
> > processor?

> > Remember that MacOS has always run in big-endian mode and that Intel has
> > always run in little-endian mode. MacOS would have to emulate
> > big-endianness for old programs just as VirtualPC for G5 has to emulate
> > litte-endianness on the G5 {earlier PowerPCs could run both ways}.

> Per, it is at this point not a matter of having to change anything, they
> already have. Every version of OS X has been developed in parallel for
> Intel. Classic will apparently not be supported any longer.

Well, they'll have to make sure that the existing programs big-endian
programs will run on MacIntel. And I don't think it will be that
difficult to implement Classic as a program - after all, we can run
Commodore 64 and CP/M-80 on our MacOS X computers.
-- 
Per Erik R�nne

In article <1gy5px9.hhag3u16fhngxN%spam@husumtoften.invalid>,
 spam@husumtoften.invalid (Per R�nne) wrote:

> Bjorn Olsson d.� <bjorn@justingenstans.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <1gy5it6.4ogqp01vfz4kpN%spam@husumtoften.invalid>,
> >  spam@husumtoften.invalid (Per R�nne) wrote:
> 
> > > How much will Apple have to change the operating system in order to let
> > > MacOS X and MacOS Classic {68K emulation including} run on an Intel
> > > processor?
> 
> > > Remember that MacOS has always run in big-endian mode and that Intel has
> > > always run in little-endian mode. MacOS would have to emulate
> > > big-endianness for old programs just as VirtualPC for G5 has to emulate
> > > litte-endianness on the G5 {earlier PowerPCs could run both ways}.
> 
> > Per, it is at this point not a matter of having to change anything, they
> > already have. Every version of OS X has been developed in parallel for
> > Intel. Classic will apparently not be supported any longer.
> 
> Well, they'll have to make sure that the existing programs big-endian
> programs will run on MacIntel. And I don't think it will be that
> difficult to implement Classic as a program - after all, we can run
> Commodore 64 and CP/M-80 on our MacOS X computers.

I am sure they have thought a great deal about how to transition 
applications to Intel. Did you watch Jobs' keynote where he was showing 
developers the tools they will need to make the transition?
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc05/
Again, it seems like they will be dropping support for Classic. Maybe 
some 3rd party developer will create a solution, but from Apple it will 
be all about OS X.

Bjorn Olsson d.� <bjorn@justingenstans.com> wrote:

> Did you watch Jobs' keynote where he was showing developers the tools they
> will need to make the transition?
> http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc05/

No, I had some problems with the sound.
-- 
Per Erik R�nne