If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on allnew ARM-core Macs
On 2020-06-24 13:41, Alan Browne wrote:
When was the last PPC Mac shipped anyway? A quick Google says Nov 2015. Doh! 2005. |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on all new ARM-core Macs
In article , Alan Browne
wrote: It's not clear to me how that was stacked up (was it x86 code throughout the parallels VM? Should be...). But it is clear that it worked. an arm version of linux. I wouldn't think so. it is. Parallels is an x86 gig. more accurately, they're a hypervisor gig, using the hypervisor on x86. part of the apple processors is also a hypervisor making it relatively easy to virtualize another arm os. So while it can be Rosetta 2'd itself, it's made to host x86 OS'. Can Rosetta 2 do the VM'd portion as well? Possibly. Indeed the icon for Mac 11 Virtualization has three heads ... it might be possible to do that, but it would not work well. Possibly Parallels and Apple worked together and Parallels have an ARM version hosting ARM Linux. yep. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on all new ARM-core Macs
In article , Alan Browne
wrote: When was the last PPC Mac shipped anyway? A quick Google says Nov 2015. i saw your correction to 2005, but that is wrong. apple announced the intel transition in june, 2005, with the first intel mac shipping in january, 2006. the entire mac lineup transitioned to intel by august, 2006, at which point apple stopped making powerpc macs. existing stock was sold until it was gone, with refurb powerpc macs selling for year or so after that. several versions of the operating system fully supported both powerpc and intel macs through 2011, six years after the transition was first announced. So while Apple can change CPU families and "manage the transition", guess what they lose when they do that ? They lost *at least* one customer... By making an orphan of my software collection, Many developers (those worth it) transitioned to x86 painlessly enough. for many developers, the transition was little more than a recompile. some had to deal with endian issues because they chose not to write endian-neutral code and it came back to bite them. Some got mired in Carbon and refused to Cocoa. To be fair many had valid business reasons to do so. intel macs support both carbon and cocoa. many apps use both. catalina (sep, 2019) is the first version to drop support of carbon ahead of the arm transition which is also only cocoa. that's ~15 years after the intel transition began. Apple provided 3 OS rounds of Rosetta support as well. (Well 1 partial round (Tiger), full round (Leopard) and optional in Snow Leopard). Stretch SL out a few years and one was covered for a 4 - 5 year period. lion (2011) was the first version to not include rosetta, which turned out to be somewhat of a dud and many people skipped it, so it was really mountain lion (2012) until powerpc apps could no longer be used for most people, about 7 years from when the intel transition was first announced. but the story goes much deeper than that. apple licensed rosetta from a company called transitive, which was later bought by ibm, who had no interest in licensing it to apple or anyone else. https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/26106.wss ARMONK, NY - 18 Nov 2008: IBM (NYSE: IBM) today announced it plans to acquire Transitive Corporation... .... Transitive is a leader in cross-platform virtualization and a pioneer in developing technologies that allow applications written for one type of microprocessor and operating system to run on multiple platforms -- with little or no modification. As a result, the technology will enable customers to consolidate their Linux-based applications onto the IBM systems that make the most sense for their business needs. rosetta 2 for arm is apple's own design and written in house, thus *not* subject to the whims of another company. it will last until there is no longer demand for it, at least 5 years. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on all new ARM-core Macs
In article , JF Mezei
wrote: "*Boot Camp Is Dead On [all new ARM-based Macs]*" Initially true. But if Microsoft starts to market ARM based Windows 10 that includes a Rosetta equivalent to run 8086 binaries, due boot might return. windows on arm already exists, although x86 emulation sucks. Have there been any hints on what boot console will be used ? Will Apple stick with EFI for its ARM based chips or use whatever it has developped for ita Axx chips for iPhone/iPad/AppleTV ? there's no reason to use efi. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on all new ARM-core Macs
In article , JF Mezei
wrote: I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, using a VM is far, far better than using Boot Camp. The VM in this case will have to be like Sheepshaver and provide a platform emulation (complete with booting support). no. From what Apple provided in Monday, Rosetta is more of a utility to do a one time convert of a file that contains 8086 binary to create another file that contains ARM binary. (both allegedly packaged under the same .APP directory structure to create that "Universal 2"). no. There was mention of JIT file support, and I have to wonder if that too will see the JIT executable fully received, converted and then launched. (would need more details to confirm). you always need more details, but that doesn't stop you from rambling. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on all new ARM-core Macs
In article , JF Mezei
wrote: existing stock was sold until it was gone, with refurb powerpc macs selling for year or so after that. Suspect that discontinued models that are still in stock and don't sell eventually go to "refurb" where Apple can price them low to get rid of them without influencing published prices for new computers. that doesn't change anything. powerpc macs ceased being made in late 2006 and within a year or so, all new and refurbs had been sold. While Apple stated 2 year transition, I suspect that it will be much faster, as was the case for the PowerpC to Intel transition as you pointed out. yep. a year from now, most, if not all macs, will be apple silicon, except maybe the mac pro, which is a high end niche system. For one thing, people will stop buying Macs now, awaiting the newer ones. Secondly, Consider that the current lineup of Macs has seen recent refreshes. So they are good to go without a new Intel model until the ARM based ones come out. sales will slow down, but they won't stop. So it is in Apple's own interest to go wuickly on this. The bigger question in my mind is how the first ARN chip will be positioned. They produced the A12 based Mac Mini for developpers. Will the first "real" one be a truly impressive high performance one for the "Pro" models, or would it be an iPad class chip for the MacBook/Air and normal iMacs? the developer transition mac is for testing and not representative of what future macs might be. some had to deal with endian issues because they chose not to write endian-neutral code and it came back to bite them. In many cases, you have no choice because of what your code interfaces with. Not all devices talk "text" in XML. And many older databases stored data in binary to space space. Many config files are in binary to prevent users editing them. Anything that is binary and stored in file becomes endian sensitive. that doesn't change the fact that some developers took shortcuts, which came back to bite them in the ass. apple licensed rosetta from a company called transitive, which was later bought by ibm, who had no interest in licensing it to apple I was puzzled by Apple's use of the erm "Rosetta". So did a big of googling. "Rosetta" was not Transitive's (so not IBM). Apple Licenced QuickTransit from Transitive and created its own brand "Rosetta" for its implemnentation. you're contradicting yourself. But I suspect Rosetta2 is far more simpler as a file coverter as opposed to converting machine code in-memory while it executes. you suspect all sorts of things, very few of which have any relevance to reality. The file converter has the luxury of relinking the image and resolving all exeternal references to point to the ARM versions of external binaries. So when the translated app is launched, it truly launches as a native app with all references to external subroutinesdynamic libraries resolved to ARNM code right at launch time and no need to trap any attempt to access untranslated code. However, consider (whcih is now very rare and impossible on many architvetures) a self modifying app that builds in memory some code to which it then branches. Such an app would be translated and launch normally, but when it writes to RAM code to which it intends to brand, that code would still be x86 and it would then crash when it tries to branch to it. (assuming it runs on a platform that allows one to branch to data memory). In am emulated environment, this would work because every instruction is translated on the fly. However, the use of self modifying code is long gone, except in virus attacks where buffer overloads attem,pt to insert specific machine code that the attacker hopes the victim will branch to. So by moving to Arm, it means those types of attacks will need to insert ARM opcodes instead of 8086 ones. # you call that simpler???? |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on all new ARM-core Macs
In article , JF Mezei
wrote: windows on arm already exists, although x86 emulation sucks. Windows NT was also available on Alpha. and Windows was available on Itanic as well. win nt was available for power pc too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT_3.51#Overview The release of Windows NT 3.51 was dubbed "the PowerPC release" at Microsoft. The original intention was to release a PowerPC edition of NT 3.5, but according to Microsoft's David Thompson, "we basically sat around for 9 months fixing bugs while we waited for IBM to finish the Power PC hardware". Editions of NT 3.51 were also released for the x86, MIPS, and Alpha architectures win nt has nothing to do with windows on arm today. there's no reason to use efi. EFI is already there , already written, no need to re-invent the wheel. efi is *not* already there for apple silicon macs. Rember that desktops require more boot functionality than a single drive iphone, have wide variety of displays, graphic cards and need to be able to boot from external disks of various interfaces (USB, thunderbolt etc( that doesn't require efi. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on allnew ARM-core Macs
On 2020-06-24 7:38 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 10:24:50 -0400, nospam wrote: apple didn't orphan anything. Hi nospam, As Paul just now eloquently exasperated... o *In one swoop, _all_ your software no longer runs native on the ARM Mac.* But if it runs just as well... ....why would you care? This loss of this one freeware tool "could be" the harbinger of the demise of freeware & 99-year licenses on ARM Mac. What are you even talking about? Time will tell on that prediction, but what we know for sure with respect to software running native on the new ARM Mac... o Apple effectively orphaned _everything_ (AFAICT) in one fell swoop! Ummm.... ...no. They didn't. That means, if you want your software to run native on the ARM Mac o You have to buy _new_ payware (which may likely be subscription based) Ummmmm... ...no. Worse... o *You now have to buy payware to replace your freeware* (e.g., boot camp). Ummmm... ...no. In one swoop, _all_ your software no longer runs native on the ARM Mac. Ummm... ...wrong. While Apple has the lowest R&D % spend in all of high tech, never underestimate the power of their MARKETING schemes, as Apple has a very high profit margin indeed - and that's clearly not due to its R&D expenditures. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on allnew ARM-core Macs
On 2020-06-24 7:40 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 14:38:11 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder wrote: o *In one swoop, _all_ your software no longer runs native on the ARM Mac.* I should have noted this was all your current "Mac" software (freeware and payware) no longer runs native on the ARM Mac. And I noted that there was no reason for you to care. Where the point of this thread is the demise of Boot Camp freeware. o The only native known alternative is payware to do the same thing. VirtualBox from Oracle... |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on all new ARM-core Macs
On 2020-06-24 12:55 p.m., JF Mezei wrote:
On 2020-06-24 00:45, Alan Baker wrote: I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, using a VM is far, far better than using Boot Camp. The VM in this case will have to be like Sheepshaver and provide a platform emulation (complete with booting support). Stop attempting to talk about things you don't understand. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on allnew ARM-core Macs
Alan Baker wrote:
On 2020-06-24 7:38 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote: On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 10:24:50 -0400, nospam wrote: apple didn't orphan anything. Hi nospam, As Paul just now eloquently exasperated... o *In one swoop, _all_ your software no longer runs native on the ARM Mac.* But if it runs just as well... ...why would you care? If you've ever run heterogenous VMs, you'll know what to expect. They can run at 0.1x to 0.01x of the native clock speed. VirtualBox in a homogenous ("untranslated") situation, runs at around 0.9x. Giving you most of the CPU core you're using. What VirtualBox doesn't always do a good job of, is running multiple cores smoothly. There are some rough edges under the hood. In some instances, it even rails a core due to some sort of tasking issue. Who wants to go from an Intel processor that turbos up to 5GHz on a single thread, to some 2GHz ARM core doing translation to make some legacy item run ? I've been through all of this before. And have no interest in "trying it" or anything else. I used to run SoftWindows on PowerPC, as well as VirtualPC (Connectix) back when it was its own company. Today, it's "native", "x86-on-x86", or "get outta town". That's why I gave the "Magical" comment, not wanting to waste the time explaining it. Paul |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on all new ARM-core Macs
On 2020-06-24 14:02:42 +0000, Paul said:
Alan Browne wrote: MS' implementation of ARM Windows on the latest Surface Pro has been a flop in several ways. Classic MS "get it out there...". There was a Win10 objective though. To justify a Cloud orientation, you have to cover all the users devices, from x86 desktops, laptops, to ARM tablets or Windows Phone. They even have a version that runs on the RPi (although graphics are gimped to a static image, as the OS in that case was for "running the hardware" and not intended as a replacement for a regular desktop). I think Windows 10 was also offered as an installable option on one of the Android smartphones. Could I run a legacy win32 application in every case ? Well, that's where the users aspirations come in. Damn those users for expecting stuff to work for them. ******* The transition for Apple, from x86 to ARM, is great for their business plan, disruptive for their users. Take me as an example. Sitting right next to me, right now, is a PowerPC Mac, a G4. Now, look in the room. Do you see an x86 Mac ? No. Why ? "Disruptive". How do I feel today about an ARM version ? Are there enough adjectives ? There are actually three Macintosh computers in this room. What do they have ? All have PowerPC. Continuity. Continuity helped make the sale. So while Apple can change CPU families and "manage the transition", guess what they lose when they do that ? They lost *at least* one customer... By making an orphan of my software collection, what else would you expect me to do ? There's not enough reality distortion field for that. Paul Your software collection wasn't "orphaned". Apple and most developers did an exceptional job at keeping most of it usable during the past CPU changeovers, and all signs point to the Intel to Apple Silicon chageover being equally as "smooth". The change from PowerPC to Intel had Rosetta which translated apps on-the-fly. The change from Intel to Apple Silicon will have Rosetta 2 which translates apps on installation and in some cases on-the-fly. There was alos the Fat / Universal binaries which allowed apps to run on both 68K Macs and PowerPC Macs, and then PowerPC Macs and Intel Macs All of that means you could still use almost all your old apps until you upgraded them. (There are of course always apps that don't work, often due to the developers not following Apple's programming rules and/or directly accessing the hardware.) Of course, if you're happy with your current hardware and software set-up, then there's no enforced requirement to update at all. I used a G3 PowerMac for about 20 years until it died with a motherboard failure. I only upgraded it to MacOS X because my useless ISP refused to fix issues with their servers that meant MacOS 9 users could no longer log onto the internet via dial-up conenctions. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on all new ARM-core Macs
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 14:40:57 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder wrote:
The only native known alternative is payware to do the same thing. Correction: I should note that even the payware described in the news article for the new Mac ARM, doesn't do the same thing as did the freeware on the old Mac (they're quite different functionalities, actually). Hence, in this case, until/unless a freeware solution is found for the new Mac ARM, the article's lament appears to be valid that the new Mac ARM will simply lose this freeware functionality that was ubiquitous on the old Mac. Having had freeware dual boot capabilities on Windows/Linux for so long I can't remember, I can't imagine that the Mac ARM users are happy losing basic functionality that puts Mac ARM users back in the Stone Age of computing without it. -- A freeware solution for the Mac ARM will perhaps be found in the future. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on all new ARM-core Macs
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 20:17:57 -0400, Paul wrote:
If you've ever run heterogenous VMs, you'll know what to expect. Hi Paul, Anyone who suggests a VM to replace BootCamp/Grub, doesn't understand either. As a purposefully helpful poster (unlike Alan Baker, who simply wants to claim the Mac does everything better than does Windows), you need to realize, if you don't already, that Alan Baker has an IQ of around 40 or 50 IMHO, so it's completely over his head that a VM isn't even close to the functionality gained simply by "booting" to that 2nd operating system. You'll have to explain that simple fact to him _multiple_ times... o And, since he's an AppleSeed cultist, he _still_ won't get it. Until/unless a freeware solution is found for the new Mac ARM, the article's lament appears to be valid that the new Mac ARM will simply lose this freeware functionality that was ubiquitous on the old Mac. Having had freeware dual boot capabilities on Windows/Linux for so long I can't remember, I can't imagine that the Mac ARM users are happy losing basic functionality that puts Mac ARM users back in the Stone Age of computing without it. I've been through all of this before. And have no interest in "trying it" or anything else. Like you, and many others, I've been through the VM hassle before also. o It's not even close to the functionality of booting directly to the OS. As you're well aware, I've written tutorials on how to set up VMs in Windows, and it's just horrid (particularly when you deal with the hardware). As such, like you, I'm done with classic VMs (and emulation also), which is well known as I openly described why I'm done with VMs in detail on the recent thread using WSL inside of Windows: o *Tutorial for setting up Ubuntu as a Windows Subsystem for Linux WSL in Windows 10* https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.comp.freeware/rOT8xBWo9dk Anyone who suggests a VM to replace BootCamp/Grub, doesn't understand either -- A freeware solution for the Mac ARM will perhaps be found in the future. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Boot Camp freeware to dual boot Windows & MacOS is dead on all new ARM-core Macs
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 13:06:35 +1200, Your Name wrote:
Your software collection wasn't "orphaned". Apple and most developers did an exceptional job at keeping most of it usable during the past CPU changeovers, and all signs point to the Intel to Apple Silicon chageover being equally as "smooth". Hi Your Name, *Nobody should be happy losing all their existing software functionality.* I realize you're a well-known Type III apologist, so I simply remind you that the topic is that the demise of the ability to multi boot on the new Mac ARM is a pretty big hit in loss of basic boot functionality, which is the topic of this thread after all. *The new Mac ARM puts users back in the Stone Age of boot functionality.* Given this loss of basic functionality on the new Mac ARM puts users in the unenviable position of being slammed back to the Stone Age of computing, Paul additionally rightly noted the loss of all prior Mac apps on the new Mac ARM puts them even further backward in terms of their current capabilities. Since you're a well known apologist, none of those facts will have any impact on you given that you justify Apple's actions in all cases, where the scary _difference_ between Type III apologists is what scares me: o Type I apologists === nospam: simply parrots Apple MARKETING always o Type II apologists === Alan Browne: not malicious, just ill informed. o Type III apologists === Your Name: actually _believes_ Apple MARKETING Notice the key differences: o Type I apologists don't believe a word they, themselves, say o Type II apologists think for themselves but often filter out facts o Type III apologists can't think for themselves - they believe the bull****. The facts appear to be, whether you can comprehend them or not: o While the Mac ARM may help Apple in _their_ brilliant business plans... o The new Mac ARM instantly causes _loss_ of critical user functionality. Only an apologists would be happy with that as the obvious 1st step. -- Nobody should be happy losing all their existing software functionality. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|