Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

TETENAL · Dec 13, 2004, 04:53 AM

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=20146

It will be funny to see this G5 machine running some kind of Windows OS.

Is Microsoft porting Windows to Mac?

Eriamjh · Dec 13, 2004, 04:54 AM

Is Microsoft porting Windows to Mac?

No.

TETENAL · Dec 13, 2004, 05:09 AM

Originally posted by Eriamjh:
No.

Then what is this web site talking about. Are they a reliable source?

Big Mac · Dec 13, 2004, 05:12 AM

Originally posted by TETENAL:
Then what is this web site talking about. Are they a reliable source?

Microsoft ported NT to the PPC when the PPC was first introduced. They may well have been keeping up-to-date in-house ports of 2000, XP, etc.

macintologist · Dec 13, 2004, 05:56 AM

I thought the Xbox 2 Developer kit is including a G5 with a special version of Windows?

Eriamjh · Dec 13, 2004, 06:17 AM

Originally posted by TETENAL:
Then what is this web site talking about. Are they a reliable source?

You will never see Windows for the G5. Microsoft simply ported a version of NT to the G5 so that they can develop Xbox games. It probably allows file browsing, internet access, but most of all, compiling, creating, and testing Xbox code. It is not a full OS and will not ever be released outside of Microsoft.

TETENAL · Dec 13, 2004, 06:41 AM

But couldn't this be used in a WINE like fashion to improve VirtualPC performance?

willed · Dec 13, 2004, 07:02 AM

I have to admit, I don't understand. Hypothetically, could a version of Windows be written for the Mac that would run regular Windows apps natively? If so, then what's the hurdle with emulation and x86 that's always talked about with VPC? If not, then wtf is this OS that they're shipping for XBox2 testing? Is it at all Windows based or is it simply another non-interoperable OS written for PPC?

djohnson · Dec 13, 2004, 07:09 AM

How funny would it be if it was actually a stripped version of Linux.

Colin Davis · Dec 13, 2004, 07:13 AM

This isn't about running PC programs on the Mac.

That's the whole reason they want to run Windows on the PPC. The software has to be different. They want to give developers as close of a platform to the new Xbox2 as possible.
So yes, it's windows, No, it won't run EITHER MAc programs OR windows programs that aren't specifically compiled to run on it, and No, no one outside of Key MS developers is Ever likely to see it.

Microsoft has had versions of windows that run on other platforms for a decade. Look up NT/PPC some time.

This is a non issue.

-Colin

Big Mac · Dec 13, 2004, 07:38 AM

Originally posted by willed:
I have to admit, I don't understand. Hypothetically, could a version of Windows be written for the Mac that would run regular Windows apps natively? If so, then what's the hurdle with emulation and x86 that's always talked about with VPC? If not, then wtf is this OS that they're shipping for XBox2 testing? Is it at all Windows based or is it simply another non-interoperable OS written for PPC?

I hate to do it, but I have to ask: Do you simply live in the town of Oxford or do you actually attend Oxford? You post here so often, so it wouldn't be presumptuous to believe that you're into computers. When you have software compiled for a given ISA, emulation of some sort is always required to run that software on a different ISA.

willed · Dec 13, 2004, 08:32 AM

Originally posted by Big Mac:
I hate to do it, but I have to ask: Do you simply live in the town of Oxford or do you actually attend Oxford? You post here so often, so it wouldn't be presumptuous to believe that you're into computers. When you have software compiled for a given ISA, emulation of some sort is always required to run that software on a different ISA.

Well that cleared things up...

Granted, my post was rather unclear and confused, probably due in large part to today's hangover. I am at university here, although I study theology, which doesn't involve too much intricate study of operating system emulation. I started posting on MacNN to solve problems on my Macs over the years, before finding that the Lounge is an excellent procrastination tool, so the inadequacy of my technological knowledge is down to the fact that I mainly use computers for MS Word and the internet.

I suppose the aim of my original post was basically to ask: if it doesn't run Windows software, and doesn't run on x86, in what way is this in fact a 'version of Windows', other than the fact that it is an OS made by Microsoft?

MilkmanDan · Dec 13, 2004, 08:34 AM

I can't wait to run XP on my Powerbook! I'll be the first one in line at the store!

GoGoReggieXPowars · Dec 13, 2004, 09:16 AM

Originally posted by MilkmanDan:
I can't wait to run XP on my Powerbook! I'll be the first one in line at the store!

I feel sorry for your PowerBook

tooki · Dec 13, 2004, 09:25 AM

Originally posted by willed:
I suppose the aim of my original post was basically to ask: if it doesn't run Windows software, and doesn't run on x86, in what way is this in fact a 'version of Windows', other than the fact that it is an OS made by Microsoft?

Being able to run a program basically involves two factors: 1) the operating system command set ("API"), and 2) being compiled for a given processor architecture ("ISA").

Let's move away from Windows for a second and look at Linux, since it runs on every ISA under the sun.

Programs for Linux (and indeed Linux itself, to all but a teeny-tiny part) are written in a "universal" fashion, that is, they're written for Linux, not for Linux-on-intel or Linux-on-PPC. Now, the source code has to be written with Linux in mind, or it won't compile.

Then the source code is compiled (=converted to machine code) for the ISA in question. So if you're running Linux on Intel, you have to compile for Intel. If you're running Linux on PPC, you compile for PPC.

Now, back to Windows.
If MS did re-release a version of Windows for PowerPC, programmers wouldn't have to do much other than recompile their programs for PowerPC. Because the Windows API didn't change, their code doesn't have to change.

tooki

Millennium · Dec 13, 2004, 10:09 AM

This is not a special version of Windows; it is merely a port of the XBox operating system. Although the XBox OS bears some similarities to Windows, it is by no means the same thing, or even close to it.

I do find it interesting that all three of the next generation's consoles -Revolution, PS3, and XBox2- will be using POWER-derived CPUs. The CPU isn't everything that goes into a console, of course -the graphics processors are all different and are arguably even more important- but it's still a curious phenomenon which may have some interesting effects on cross-console gaming for the next generation.

Eug Wanker · 10:55 AM

The original Xbox OS is a stripped down and modified version of Windows NT 5.x (Win 2000+). The Xbox 2 OS is rumoured to be similar to the Xbox OS, but obviously partially based on updated versions of the previous PowerPC NT builds.

Wiskedjak · Dec 13, 2004, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by Eriamjh:
You will never see Windows for the G5.

Why not? MS doesn't care if you're running Windows on a Dell or an Apple.

mitchell_pgh · Dec 13, 2004, 11:14 AM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
Why not? MS doesn't care if you're running Windows on a Dell or an Apple.

Because Apple keeps their hardware somewhat of a secret. Also, talk about tiny market. 5% of a 5% market isn't worth 2X the development of the OS core.

Angus_D · Dec 13, 2004, 11:48 AM

No.

Randman · Dec 13, 2004, 11:51 AM

Originally posted by MilkmanDan:
I can't wait to run XP on my Powerbook!

VPC.

hayesk · Dec 13, 2004, 11:59 AM

Originally posted by tooki:

Now, back to Windows.
If MS did re-release a version of Windows for PowerPC, programmers wouldn't have to do much other than recompile their programs for PowerPC. Because the Windows API didn't change, their code doesn't have to change.

Not necessarily. Some products' source code might have machine (assembly code) which is CPU specific. One of the rumoured reasons Access was never ported to the Mac was because a lot of the database engine was written in assembly code.

Other code might take advantage of or is optimized for certain characteristics of a CPU. Take photoshop for example, I don't think it's straight high-level ansi-C. Of course, the Mac has photoshop, but this is just an example.

In summary, for some apps - yep, recompile, others, a little or a lot more work.

CharlesS · Dec 13, 2004, 12:03 PM

You could try this.

Wiskedjak · Dec 13, 2004, 01:33 PM

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
Because Apple keeps their hardware somewhat of a secret. Also, talk about tiny market. 5% of a 5% market isn't worth 2X the development of the OS core.

Yes, but M$ must have at least some knowledge of that hardware in order to develop VPC.

tooki · Dec 13, 2004, 01:41 PM

Nope.

The Mac's development is based around not knowing the innards of the machine. That's how Apple managed to maintain application compatibility (for "properly" written programs) from System 1 all the way through Mac OS 9.2.2. Apple deliberately masks the hardware from developers, so that they only see a standardized application interface. Only the OS (and some drivers) deal directly with the hardware.

Windows, by the way, largely follows the same structure, as does any other modern OS, including Linux and other *nixes.

tooki

Fothb · Dec 13, 2004, 02:52 PM

If I'm not mistaken, all game development done for the Xbox is based on DirectX. I'm assuming that by going RISC with the Xbox2, Microsoft has at the very least come up with a way of implementing support for DirectX on these chips. The prospect of having full native DirectX support running under OS X on G5 chips has me far more excited than the possibility of running Windows...

But just because they are using G5 chips doesn't mean that any of their work will in any way benefit Mac users. I can remember when the specs for the original Xbox were announced. Many people optimistically hoped that someone would release a tool allowing them to simply pop their Xbox game discs into their desktop PC's DVD drive and play them under Windows. Yet while that didn't happen, the fact that the titles were DirectX based made porting to and from the Xbox and PC much, much easier than it would be for the other consoles. If the same happens for the Mac G5s, obviously it would benefit us.