Author Topic: Darwin x86 (Read 950 times)

billy_gates · « **on:** 22 October 2002, 21:00 »

Does Darwin x86 support AMD CPU's yet?
Has anyone ported the aqua UI to it?

cloudstrife · « **Reply #1 on:** 22 October 2002, 21:26 »

as of 1.4.1 i do not believe it suppports amd-style mobos... so no it doesnt support amd chips.

no, but i sure as hell wish someone had ported it!

hm_murdock · « **Reply #2 on:** 22 October 2002, 21:48 »

Aqua will never be included with Darwin on any platform. Aqua requires the Quartz display layer. Both of them are part of Mac OS X and are not open source. It is possible that Rhapsody's Display PostScript layer could find its way into Darwin, giving it a native display layer.

That would be goooooood, as long as it's able to run Cocoa apps

preacher · « **Reply #3 on:** 22 October 2002, 12:11 »

The only thing I dislike about macs is the way they dumb down the names of everything. Aqua, Quartz, cocoa, I mean that sounds so wussy.

MacUser3of5 · « **Reply #4 on:** 22 October 2002, 12:22 »

What are they supposed to call them?
BigFuckingPenisDisplayLayer?
HardcorePornApplicationInterface?

It's called Quartz because it's 'crystal clear' and Aqua because the interface 'flows like water'... Those Apple peeps sure have a sense of humor about things... Does anyone else remember the developer code name 'BHA'? or Clarus, the dogcow? The dogcow 'technical article' still makes me laugh...

I don't think you could port Aqua to x86 very easily (if at all) because it would still require almost a total rewrite of most of the 'OS X' layer... not to mention apps would have to be recomiled. You would need the source, which Apple doesn't seem interested in giving out for an x86 port... although there is that mysterious Marklar rumor...

Calum · « **Reply #5 on:** 22 October 2002, 15:07 »

i always laugh at the 'codenames' linux distros get. i mean! mandrake 9 is 'dolphin'! and mandrake 8.2 was 'bluebird'! not only that, but linux recognises my pentium 3 chip as a 'coppermine' 850Mhz! what? also, red hat is as bad with its valhalla and so on (i expect this is the sort of non wussy name that apple stuff should be called).
Who needs all this stuff? seriously, i would never get an operating system called 'potato' regardless of how good it was! why do we need all these weird names anyway? everybody just calls them debian 3.0, red hat 8.0, mandrake 8.2, pentium 3 and so on anyway!

Zombie9920 · « **Reply #6 on:** 22 October 2002, 19:37 »

quote:
Originally posted by Calum:
but linux recognises my pentium 3 chip as a 'coppermine' 850Mhz! what?

That is because the Flipchip(FC-PGA Socket 370) Pentium III's are called Coppermines. The FC-PGA Celerons(the ones that look like Soket 370 PIII's) are known as Coppermines also(also referred to as Celemine).

The Coppermine PIII's are alot faster than the original Slot 1 PIII's because they feature full speed on die cache while the Slot 1 PIII's have half speed cache(your 850mhz PIII has 850mhz cache whereas a Slot 1 PIII running at 850mhz would have 425mhz Cache).

voidmain · « **Reply #7 on:** 22 October 2002, 21:07 »

quote:
Originally posted by Calum:
Who needs all this stuff? seriously, i would never get an operating system called 'potato' regardless of how good it was! why do we need all these weird names anyway? everybody just calls them debian 3.0, red hat 8.0, mandrake 8.2, pentium 3 and so on anyway!

I agree, but all OSs use these code names that I am aware of, even Microsoft. Longhorn is not what that operating system will be called when it is released. They use name Snowball for Win311, Chicago for Win95, Memphis for Win98, Daytona for WinNT 3.5, Cairo for WinNT 4.0, Whistler for XP, Longhorn will be XP 2nd edition, etc:

http://www.phm.lu/Documentation/Windows/Codenames.asp

As far as RedHat, they had a different code name for each of the beta stages, Valhalla is the one that happened to go final:

http://www.smoogespace.com/documents/behind_the_names.html

[ October 22, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]

preacher · « **Reply #8 on:** 22 October 2002, 21:40 »

quote:
Originally posted by MacUser3of5:
What are they supposed to call them?
BigFuckingPenisDisplayLayer?
HardcorePornApplicationInterface?

It's called Quartz because it's 'crystal clear' and Aqua because the interface 'flows like water'... Those Apple peeps sure have a sense of humor about things... Does anyone else remember the developer code name 'BHA'? or Clarus, the dogcow? The dogcow 'technical article' still makes me laugh...

I don't think you could port Aqua to x86 very easily (if at all) because it would still require almost a total rewrite of most of the 'OS X' layer... not to mention apps would have to be recomiled. You would need the source, which Apple doesn't seem interested in giving out for an x86 port... although there is that mysterious Marklar rumor...

I would definately by an OS with those names.

Calum · « **Reply #9 on:** 22 October 2002, 21:44 »

Red Hat 8.1 "Cocksucker-Motherfucker" - - -

I'd like to see how they'd make that connection on that 'red hat names' website!

ravuya · « **Reply #10 on:** 24 October 2002, 02:27 »

quote:
Originally posted by Calum:
Red Hat 8.1 "Cocksucker-Motherfucker" - - -

I'd like to see how they'd make that connection on that 'red hat names' website!

The page is here for all of you too slow to use google.

Calum · « **Reply #11 on:** 24 October 2002, 02:39 »

well, they're too slow to have added the codename for red hat 8.1 yet, i mean COME ON! even i know what it is already!!!!!

voidmain · « **Reply #12 on:** 24 October 2002, 03:40 »

Ok, I'll bite. What will 8.1 be called? And where did you find it?

MacUser3of5 · « **Reply #13 on:** 24 October 2002, 04:51 »

Maybe it will be called 'Well, It's No Aqua But At Least We Tried'

ThePreacher: Oh, I wasn't really suprised that you would... no offense

voidmain · « **Reply #14 on:** 24 October 2002, 05:01 »

quote:
Originally posted by MacUser3of5:
Maybe it will be called 'Well, It's No Aqua But At Least We Tried'

I can't imagine why they would would name it that since Aqua is not an Operating System and certainly isn't a distribution. Hmmm..

« previous next » Print Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Author Topic: Darwin x86 (Read 950 times) billy_gates Member Posts: 801 Kudos: 0 Darwin x86 « on: 22 October 2002, 21:00 » Does Darwin x86 support AMD CPU's yet? Has anyone ported the aqua UI to it? Logged Tired of the MES? Take A Visit To My Site cloudstrife Member Posts: 146 Kudos: 0 Darwin x86 « Reply #1 on: 22 October 2002, 21:26 » as of 1.4.1 i do not believe it suppports amd-style mobos... so no it doesnt support amd chips. no, but i sure as hell wish someone had ported it! Logged hm_murdock VIP Posts: 2,629 Kudos: 378 The Lord of Thyme Darwin x86 « Reply #2 on: 22 October 2002, 21:48 » Aqua will never be included with Darwin on any platform. Aqua requires the Quartz display layer. Both of them are part of Mac OS X and are not open source. It is possible that Rhapsody's Display PostScript layer could find its way into Darwin, giving it a native display layer. That would be goooooood, as long as it's able to run Cocoa apps Logged Go the fuck ~ preacher VIP Posts: 858 Kudos: 107 Darwin x86 « Reply #3 on: 22 October 2002, 12:11 » The only thing I dislike about macs is the way they dumb down the names of everything. Aqua, Quartz, cocoa, I mean that sounds so wussy. Logged Kansas City Hustle http://kansascity.cjb.net MacUser3of5 Member Posts: 78 Kudos: 0 Darwin x86 « Reply #4 on: 22 October 2002, 12:22 » What are they supposed to call them? BigFuckingPenisDisplayLayer? HardcorePornApplicationInterface? It's called Quartz because it's 'crystal clear' and Aqua because the interface 'flows like water'... Those Apple peeps sure have a sense of humor about things... Does anyone else remember the developer code name 'BHA'? or Clarus, the dogcow? The dogcow 'technical article' still makes me laugh... I don't think you could port Aqua to x86 very easily (if at all) because it would still require almost a total rewrite of most of the 'OS X' layer... not to mention apps would have to be recomiled. You would need the source, which Apple doesn't seem interested in giving out for an x86 port... although there is that mysterious Marklar rumor... Logged "Let them call me a rebel and welcome, I feel no concern from it; but I should suffer the misery of devils, were I to make a whore of my soul..." - Thomas Paine Calum Global Moderator Posts: 7,812 Kudos: 1000 Darwin x86 « Reply #5 on: 22 October 2002, 15:07 » i always laugh at the 'codenames' linux distros get. i mean! mandrake 9 is 'dolphin'! and mandrake 8.2 was 'bluebird'! not only that, but linux recognises my pentium 3 chip as a 'coppermine' 850Mhz! what? also, red hat is as bad with its valhalla and so on (i expect this is the sort of non wussy name that apple stuff should be called). Who needs all this stuff? seriously, i would never get an operating system called 'potato' regardless of how good it was! why do we need all these weird names anyway? everybody just calls them debian 3.0, red hat 8.0, mandrake 8.2, pentium 3 and so on anyway! Logged visit these websites and make yourself happy forever: It's my music! \| My music on MySpace \| Integrational Polytheism Zombie9920 Member Posts: 1,309 Kudos: 33 Darwin x86 « Reply #6 on: 22 October 2002, 19:37 » quote: Originally posted by Calum: but linux recognises my pentium 3 chip as a 'coppermine' 850Mhz! what? That is because the Flipchip(FC-PGA Socket 370) Pentium III's are called Coppermines. The FC-PGA Celerons(the ones that look like Soket 370 PIII's) are known as Coppermines also(also referred to as Celemine). The Coppermine PIII's are alot faster than the original Slot 1 PIII's because they feature full speed on die cache while the Slot 1 PIII's have half speed cache(your 850mhz PIII has 850mhz cache whereas a Slot 1 PIII running at 850mhz would have 425mhz Cache). Logged voidmain VIP Posts: 5,605 Kudos: 184 Darwin x86 « Reply #7 on: 22 October 2002, 21:07 » quote: Originally posted by Calum: Who needs all this stuff? seriously, i would never get an operating system called 'potato' regardless of how good it was! why do we need all these weird names anyway? everybody just calls them debian 3.0, red hat 8.0, mandrake 8.2, pentium 3 and so on anyway! I agree, but all OSs use these code names that I am aware of, even Microsoft. Longhorn is not what that operating system will be called when it is released. They use name Snowball for Win311, Chicago for Win95, Memphis for Win98, Daytona for WinNT 3.5, Cairo for WinNT 4.0, Whistler for XP, Longhorn will be XP 2nd edition, etc: http://www.phm.lu/Documentation/Windows/Codenames.asp As far as RedHat, they had a different code name for each of the beta stages, Valhalla is the one that happened to go final: http://www.smoogespace.com/documents/behind_the_names.html [ October 22, 2002: Message edited by: void main ] Logged Someone please remove this account. Thanks... preacher VIP Posts: 858 Kudos: 107 Darwin x86 « Reply #8 on: 22 October 2002, 21:40 » quote: Originally posted by MacUser3of5: What are they supposed to call them? BigFuckingPenisDisplayLayer? HardcorePornApplicationInterface? It's called Quartz because it's 'crystal clear' and Aqua because the interface 'flows like water'... Those Apple peeps sure have a sense of humor about things... Does anyone else remember the developer code name 'BHA'? or Clarus, the dogcow? The dogcow 'technical article' still makes me laugh... I don't think you could port Aqua to x86 very easily (if at all) because it would still require almost a total rewrite of most of the 'OS X' layer... not to mention apps would have to be recomiled. You would need the source, which Apple doesn't seem interested in giving out for an x86 port... although there is that mysterious Marklar rumor... I would definately by an OS with those names. Logged Kansas City Hustle http://kansascity.cjb.net Calum Global Moderator Posts: 7,812 Kudos: 1000 Darwin x86 « Reply #9 on: 22 October 2002, 21:44 » Red Hat 8.1 "Cocksucker-Motherfucker" - - - I'd like to see how they'd make that connection on that 'red hat names' website! Logged visit these websites and make yourself happy forever: It's my music! \| My music on MySpace \| Integrational Polytheism ravuya VIP Posts: 517 Kudos: 0 Darwin x86 « Reply #10 on: 24 October 2002, 02:27 » quote: Originally posted by Calum: Red Hat 8.1 "Cocksucker-Motherfucker" - - - I'd like to see how they'd make that connection on that 'red hat names' website! The page is here for all of you too slow to use google. Logged Calum Global Moderator Posts: 7,812 Kudos: 1000 Darwin x86 « Reply #11 on: 24 October 2002, 02:39 » well, they're too slow to have added the codename for red hat 8.1 yet, i mean COME ON! even i know what it is already!!!!! Logged visit these websites and make yourself happy forever: It's my music! \| My music on MySpace \| Integrational Polytheism voidmain VIP Posts: 5,605 Kudos: 184 Darwin x86 « Reply #12 on: 24 October 2002, 03:40 » Ok, I'll bite. What will 8.1 be called? And where did you find it? Logged Someone please remove this account. Thanks... MacUser3of5 Member Posts: 78 Kudos: 0 Darwin x86 « Reply #13 on: 24 October 2002, 04:51 » Maybe it will be called 'Well, It's No Aqua But At Least We Tried' ThePreacher: Oh, I wasn't really suprised that you would... no offense Logged "Let them call me a rebel and welcome, I feel no concern from it; but I should suffer the misery of devils, were I to make a whore of my soul..." - Thomas Paine voidmain VIP Posts: 5,605 Kudos: 184 Darwin x86 « Reply #14 on: 24 October 2002, 05:01 » quote: Originally posted by MacUser3of5: Maybe it will be called 'Well, It's No Aqua But At Least We Tried' I can't imagine why they would would name it that since Aqua is not an Operating System and certainly isn't a distribution. Hmmm.. Logged Someone please remove this account. Thanks... Print Pages: [1] 2 Go Up « previous next » Stop Microsoft » Forum » Operating Systems » Mac OS » Darwin x86
Share or donate

Author Topic: Darwin x86 (Read 950 times)

Share or donate