*codename: Chameleon Revealed* Os X On Intel

O

osxonintel

Registered
CUPERTINO, CALIF > It is confirmed via IRC chat (efnet, #macosx) by an Apple employee by the name of Michael (last name is unverified) with the email address mikey@apple.com has broke the news. Michael works for Apple in the Research and Development (r&d) Department. There he is given daily task to test and analysis different software products before they go to beta or open market.
As the informant explains Apple has been developing a x86 version of OS X to run on Intel hardware. As rumors go they have only been developing x86 OS X to run on Intel and VIA Apollo Pro 133A x86 chipsets, BUT NOT AMD761 or VIA KT133 chipsets. Speculation is assumed that a port for other x86 chipsets will follow. Michael described it as, "they took x86 boards and mounted them in 9600 cases"

No release date for the x86 version of Mac OS (codename: Chameleon) is planned, and no official word is available from Apple. Michael confirmed that it is only a "back up plan". He wouldn't elaborate too much on "back up plan", but he did go on to say that it is most likely being developed in the event that Apple hardware sales should start to drop.

06/25/01

The following are exerts from previous conversations with Michael from Apple. The conversers identity has been withheld for their anonymity.

<--CUT-->

0:16: *MikeyD* yes

0:16: -> *MikeyD* hrm

0:16: -> *MikeyD* what stage

0:16: *MikeyD* tons, ranging from rhapsody to latest Bagheera/Devi2V4 builds

0:17: -> *MikeyD* ok

0:17: *MikeyD* shhh

0:17: -> *MikeyD* heh

0:17: -> *MikeyD* what possible strategy is releasing osx intel

0:18: -> *MikeyD* does it have a Red Box ?

0:19: *MikeyD* well, i can tell you think

0:19: *MikeyD* this even

0:20: *MikeyD* the project codename is camealon (spelling errors aside) and i think its more of just an ace card incase they have to

0:20: *MikeyD* purely a contingency plan, but i dont know for sure

0:21: *MikeyD* they took x86 boards and mounted them in 9600 cases

0:21: *MikeyD* ill take a snap shot of one of the machines with the boards on it

0:21: -> *MikeyD* they can't be doing osx intel 'just in case it proves useful'

0:21: *MikeyD* i havent had a chance to take an in depth looks at them yet

0:21: *MikeyD* mainly cause im not allowed to

0:22: *MikeyD* no, its just incase they have to release it

0:22: -> *MikeyD* in what situation would they have to release it?

0:23: *MikeyD* downfall of the hardware maybe? i dunno

0:23: -> *MikeyD* sounds really silly

0:23: -> *MikeyD* porting osx is a 4000 Kg project

0:23: -> *MikeyD* they have to intend to do something with it

0:28: *MikeyD* like i said, the way everyone else int he lab is viewing it is that its a backup plan incase hardware sales fail

0:28: *MikeyD* but i have no real proof other than it exists

0:28: *MikeyD* and the chosen ones get to test it

0:28: -> *MikeyD* .. ok

0:28: *MikeyD* ill get you a snap of it

0:28: -> *MikeyD* kewl

0:28: *MikeyD* ill brb..shh, im bring my boss over

0:29: -> *MikeyD* would be nice with an About This Computer box on it

<--END CUT-->

More info will be provided as it becomes available.

***JUST ADDED*** PLEASE VISIT http://zineotic.com/osx/ TO SEE WHY AND WHAT THIS THREAD IS ALL ABOUT...

 
An apple employee giving you his e-mail AT APPLE FOR GOD's SAKE!!!! either this guy does give a damn about his job or a lawsuit, or this has to be one of the biggest misinformation campaigns I've seen in a while.


DJ XTC
 
I have to agree with a post on one of the other forums, mikeyd@apple.com doesn't sound lika a realistic apple.com email adress.

I really hope there's some truth behind this though... What if Motorola suddenly decides to stop developing the PPC platform...? Or maybe they and Apple have some kind of long term agreement?
 
Originally posted by Kristjan
... What if Motorola suddenly decides to stop developing the PPC platform...?
Click to expand...

Actually that would not be a bad thing. IBM has been able to push the chips out better and faster than Motorola. Infact IBM has had 700+ MHz G3 processors for over a year, but Apple wouldn't use them because the Motorola version of the G4 (with the Velocity Engine) was stuck at 500 MHz. If Motorola dropped out of site, Apple could buy the Velocity Engine and license it to IBM, and the Mac world would be moving along that much faster (remember that IBM had 600 MHz rated G4s in the ones they made to make up for Motorola not being able to produce enough 500 or 450 MHz processors when Apple was introducing the G4 systems).
 
I agree with pretty much everyone who's said that Apple would be daft to port OSX onto Intel, for all the reasons that have been given (and AS IF they're going to be soending that amount of money on something as a 'back-up' in case their hardware sales drop off), but just cos it's stupid, it doesn't necessarily mean that they're not going to do it... eMate, anyone?

But to the matter in hand, posts have already appeared on the other forums mentioned, apparently from the mysterious MikeyD himself, claiming the whole thing is a hoax. If you read the stuff about him on the orginal thread, it would seem that the whole thing is one big hatchet job to get the guy fired/ flamed/ spammed/ Service-denied, whatever...

Also, replies that have been posted on forums are then being lifted to bulk out a 'what people have said about this thread' page on the original site. Speaking as a person who more than once has used the wonderful anonymity provided by the web to use forums and chatrooms to perpetuate stupid hoax sites (usually for made-up bands with particularly lurid names), I suggest that we as a forum treat this thread, and the original poster, with the suspicion that it warrants. It'd be a shame if a friendly, helpful community like this one got dragged into someone's personal vendettas....

Just my 2pen'orth....
 
Damn someone beat me to the punch !!!!

let me reiterate cause I am all fired up lol :p

1) How do you know for sure that he works for apple ??? Well hell I can come here and pose as an Apple/IBM/Intel/CIA/KGB/FBI/THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA (well the last one would be kinda hard to do given that I dont know spanish) ... but the point is I could do that and convincingly ... and no one really knows who I am, what I do and what I say is true

2) Do you REALLY think he would give out his e-mail you dimwhits? He is probably under a much much stricter NDA than appledev members ... he could get in A LOT OF TROUBLE

3) Finally this guy just wanted his 15 minutes of fame and he made up all this.... no intel port...not now...it aint gonna work on so many levels.


Admiral
 
lets not overlook that fact that this thread was started by someone who is new to this forum, and may just be trying to get people to use another site or is just throwing a stone in our little pond to see the waves. I would point out that if Apple was working with PCs they wouldn't be hiding it. During the first couple years back at Apple Jobs didn't try to hide the fact that he used an IBM ThinkPad running first OPENSTEP and later Rhapsody. It seems highly unlikely that Apple (which has Darwin for i386 systems) would feel the need to hide such systems inside old Mac boxes. As for Mac OS X on Intel, it has died, Apple is have a hard enough time getting Mac users to use the system given the lack of applications. An Intel version would lack Classic and most of Carbon (which would mean starting the Finder all over again), Apple started down quite a different path after they dropped Rhapsody for Intel. But we have covered this path many times in other threads.
 
Either this guy created a new screen name to be anonymous, or he's just starting out. Either way, lets just give him a break. Everyone gets excited sometimes. Although I generally only get excitied for things that would promote the platform:)
 
I KNOW I just said we shout leave it alone, but I got curious... Oddly enough, if you go to
http://zineotic.com/
it's all about lizards. It's not anything to do with computers at all, let alone OSX, and there are no links to /osx on this front page. I'm guessing that whoever owns that domain is hosting this massive piece of defamation without knowing. Which further leads me to treat the whole thing with a little more suspicion...

BTW, I just found out that if I click the green 'maximise' button on the pop-up java window you get when inserting vBcode, you just get a massive white window with nothing written on it. Odd, huh?
 
Well, this is likely a rumor, regardless, it is one that is very widespread. I have seen two websites already that are completely devoted to exactly this - porting OSX to intel.

One of them is a petition-like site, asking people to post their e-mail and a comment to show support for apple porting OSX to intel, I visited there about a month ago, and they had just over 50k signatures.

Also, if you go to MacOS rumors (http://www.mosr.com/) there is a rumor (a rubbutal) rather from another alledged apple employee who has stated that OSX is actually running on SOME intel machines, although it is very unstable, and will likely never be relased because of that unstableness and for fear of retaliation from the gods at Microsoft.

I'm not attesting to the validity of any of this information, but thought you might like to parhaps check it out for yourselves.
 
All I can say about that article is that it is COW DUNG .... plain and simple.

Someone wanted his 15 minutes of fame. No apple employee would risk giving ALL THAT INFO ... especially the amount that they will supposedly buy off motorola's part in PPC.

If *I* were an apple employee I and I knew relevent info that apple would deliver some kickass product in NY ... I would just sit back, put my feet on the table, take a big sip of my favorite beverage and think to myself

"Those damn idiots...they keep caughing up stories about the demise of apple.... I know that in a few days we will amaze the world once more...and my job is safe and secure *siiiiiip* aaaaahhhhh yeah baby that is the life "


Admiral
 
Ok People. Lets get one thing straight. Unless anyone here is directly involved in the development of OS X or Darwin, don't say 'no way, no how' to anything. I don't care if you are the bomb shiznat Apple Developer. OS X is a far cry from OS 9 or any other classic Mac OS. Its based on Linux (BSD). How many Apple programmers (although very smart) know jack abot Linux or Unix or BSD. I will tell you, not many. If you are out there and you do, you are the man (or woman). So speculate all you want. Dream of Apple isolation or OS X on every machine (die M$ die), but don't act like you know something that we all don't, because, well, you don't.
 
Originally posted by Shotokan
Ok People. Lets get one thing straight... Dream of Apple isolation or OS X on every machine (die M$ die), but don't act like you know something that we all don't, because, well, you don't.
Click to expand...

From my count there are at least two people who have posted in this thread that have experience working with an Apple OS for Intel based hardware, and at least four who regularly post to this site. The history of that OS (Rhapsody) was played out to a very sad conclusion. There was an honest effort by Apple to make it work (and it works great!), but in the end it didn't get enough support from developers (most of whom came from OPENSTEP on Intel systems) for Apple to continue working with it. Mind you that this was a time when there was only Yellow Box (Cocoa) and Blue Box (Classic) to work with and Rhapsody for Intel was only missing Blue Box. Now with Mac OS X many of the core apps (like the Finder) are not even Cocoa, their Carbon. This means that Apple would have to invest more time and money into porting Carbon to Intel (which doesn't mean that all Carbon apps could be ported). The logic and history shows that this path was traveled by Apple a few years ago and they have no reason to try it again any time soon (they have there hands full just trying to get Mac OS X for PPC up and running with as many major apps as possible).
 
I think it noteworthy to say 2 things.

1) osxonintel joined on 6/26 and shotokan on 6/29, both with one post. It's quite reasonable to assume that they are the same person (although I could be wrong)

2) As you have said on other threads RacerX, is apple were doing this OS X on intel this, it would not be a secret. IT would need all the support from developers (for apps) and from BSD hobbyists (for more darwin compatibility). Secrecy would not work with OS X INTEL... also one would need the legendary Red Box to run winblows apps.


Also rhapsody, as well as open/nextstep rock ;) Too bad there werent a lot of Rhap apps around ... I remember the days I used to read rumors about rhapsody and how it would have been bi-platform etc etc....that is all past...the future of apple OSs for now lies with PPC which is a better processor in comparison with intel crap.


Admiral
 
they DO have differing agendas. Shotokan, at least, is contributing in his/her own way to a thread on whether OSX will be ported to Wintel. OSXONINTEL, however, is just trying to prove a point to someone he feels slighted him. I doubt he could care less about whether this mighty OS is ported onto those horrible horrible machines...
 
Ideas and opinions are great, but when someone says something like "...but don't act like you know something that we all don't, because, well, you don't." when we are all contributing information that we do have and is (in some cases) well documented, you have to expect heated responses.
 
First of all, I am me and I do not know who 'OSXonIntel' is. I have been reading this forum for months now, just never joined. I have no agenda here other than to remind everyone to keep an open mind when it comes to OS X. I went to lunch with a friend today and we got into a discussion about OS X. I was telling him how great it would be if OS X could run on x86 based machines. He replied that if OS X ran on x86 machines, that OS X would start to suffer from the same errors as Window$ does. But if wouldn't. For those of us poor souls that in addition to Macs, have to use a PC for part of our day, we all know that 99% of problems Windows users face are soaftware based (aka Windows and dll hell). Hardware made for x86 machines is everybit as good as Apple based stuff. The fact is, Window$ is a crappy OS. Marketing is what got MS where it is today. I have a 400Mhz G4 Alti-vec and a 800Mhz AMD Athlon Thunderbird and I can tell that I would LOVE to see what OS X could do on my Athlon. I, however, like some others who like Macs, feel that OS X would almost be 'cheapened' by a port to x86 architecture. So I guess it is a question of survival. Apple could port OS X to x86 and devour a huge market share, or stay with PPC, retain the image and suffer financially. Either way, the next year should prove to be very interesting. Laterz.
 
Originally posted by Shotokan
The fact is, Window$ is a crappy OS. Marketing is what got MS where it is today.
Click to expand...

Microsoft Windows got to where it is today by having two factor in it favor;
1) prior to 1997 PC hardware was significantly less expensive than Apple hardware (this is not true today, and so is no longer a factor),
2) application base.

I love Rhapsody on my ThinkPad! It is my second system. It goes with me almost everywhere. But I can tell you right now that Rhapsody on a PowerBook 3400 would be twice as good. Why? Not because of Blue Box (which doesn't work on the 3400's), but because there are twice as many Yellow Box apps for Rhapsody for PPC than for Intel. If you ask people on this forum how many are using Mac OS X as their primary system without using classic, you would find the number alarmingly small. And if you asked that small number if they would be using Mac OS X if it had even less apps than it does now only a small number of them would say that they would. Now given those types of numbers as a user base, Mac OS X would be slapped around on the Intel platform not by Windows, but by Be! Yes, that's right, Mac OS X for Intel would have (in actual users) only a small fraction of the number that Be has now.

So, I would say that your statement: "Apple could port OS X to x86 and devour a huge market share, or stay with PPC, retain the image and suffer financially." is as far from actual reality of the market as you can get.
 
I am not sure where the argument lies in the last post. If the only reason that 95% of end users use Windows is because "prior to 1997 PC hardware was significantly less expensive than Apple hardware", what happened to OS/2 and other early x86 OSes? They all ran good, and people who have ever used OS/2 know, it outperformed Windows in every way. When I mentioned 'marketing' in the my preious post, I may have confused you with my ambiguity, I did not necessarily mean consumer marketing, rather corporate marketing. The majority of Microsoft's marketing budget is spent on business-to-business marketing. I guess what I am trying to say is that the rise of Windows to a 95% market share, the simple fact that its a merket dominant OS, has very little do do with hardware prices, or application base. There are vastly more applications for the x86 platform (Windows,OS/2,Bex86,FreBSD,Linux,Unix,etc.) that there are for the PPC (OS9,OS X, BePPC, etc). I think I can count on two hands all the apllications that, besides Apple apps, only run on PPC hardware. I am in now way trying to degrade OS X, or Macs for that matter. I think we are starting to enter the realm of opinions, where is is quite possible to disagree forever. :) At any rate, I hope this clarifies my position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top