Just a rumor?

I interact with many MacAddicts here in Rhode Island and keep hearing intermittently that Apple intends to create an Intel/AMD version of the Mac OS. (seems like that would be cool) The evidence others have used is sort of based on the fact that the core of the new Mac OS is pure unix in origin. Therefore: should work with any processor with some tweaking. Hence, Mac OS for the PC. Is it just a rumour? Could you imagine a Tiger PC with the elegance of a Mac OS? Yikes!

I also heard about the Mac OS on a PC. I haven't seen or read any documentation about it though. Anyone?????

Yeah, but how does the software perform on Virtual PC ? Anybody try that?

How you use something plays a part here. You can't just measure some process running at the chip level...and say..that your computer would run faster..... I mean..you can, but then it won't mean squat as far as how everything else works together. You can use these as an Indicator though that that particular system is working well. And in that regard..G4s have always been well designed, efficient chips. To get application side performance..by that I mean...what YOU see come out the other end..everything has to work together. The hardware "and" the software. It's like benchmarking a dump truck with a huge v8 ...vs a honda civic with a straight 4. On the dyno..the dump truck engine makes mega HP and torque. Kills the honda. But, then you test them in some usage. Drive from point a to point b. Honda would kill the dump truck because of gearing, weight..etc. But, then if the test was to move 100 tons of dirt from point a to b.?...you get the idea. So "how" you use something is also as important as "how" all the components work together. Here's a test of a dual ghz against an AMD and Intel box...in Photoshop, After Effects, etc. Heres something else to check out: These are posted times to complete test scenes that come with Lightwave 3d. Choose the amount of results you want to return (25 or 50)...then choose the scene you want to check scores on (Raytrace..etc)...then choose LW 7.5 as the version (otherwise..you'll have to get 100 scores to even find a mac listed ..cause they just got LW running decent on it). In some of these tests...you'll find a mac somewhere in the top 15 or 20 scores. But..then.look at the difference in render time. The macs are about 2x to 3x slower (depending on scene). Imagine rendering a 4000 frame scene. (times listed are per frame) Now...the software your running has a lot to do with this. So, there are plenty of variables...but then...."WE" have to run that software too. I won't even mention the Davec tests..except to say...that the average results of it....almost exactly coincide with the performance differences shown in these other applications tests (about 2x to 3x difference). If we were to give an award for the most efficiently designed cpu...then MOTO G4 would win. It's really miles ahead of the other 2 in this regard. But, if your sitting on the other end of the computer...measuring things coming out the other end of applications..etc..then everything has to work together to produce results and a lot of things can go wrong along the way....bad APIs, poorly optimized apps...bus bottlenecks, bridge bottlenecks...controller issues..etc. I believe the Mac has many advantages as a total package...but...having both PC's and Macs at home..for long time now...I've conceded the whole speed thing long ago. apple had an Intel box running OS X...years ago. It was called the "star wars" project...just to prove it was possible. While the core of apple Mac OS was written around moto for years ..the core of OS X was not. Not to mention that IBM made the G3's not Motorola. ...but that transition was rather smooth taht I remember..and well worth any inconvienience OS X..was built from Next technology..based on unix kernel. Its an entirely different animal. But I agree It would be "drastic" for apple to have to move to AMD or INtel fo ra lot of reasons. I would think..they will go with the new IBM chips if it comes to that (and it might). The new IBM chips have a "vector" unit..that handles 130 vector instructions (thats altivec folks). It's 4 cpu cores on one chip. Its a quad on a single cpu card...and they have some running at 3 ghz already. Now..they still have to get this all working in the chipset (northbridge..uni N controller) and all that has to work together (..ie..the current FSB bottleneck with the G4s)...so changes would have to be made here as well but it's entirely possible to be done..and fairly quickly at least on the hardware side. The whole fly in the ointment is this:..the laptops. The G4 is the "perfect" cpu for laptops...low power consumption...low heat..etc. IBM chips are "hot" and big. So are AMD's...and they eat power like candy. I don't know if it's possible for apple to "split" the line and use G4s in laptop and IBM's in towers. I do know that OS X is capable of handling this...as the old NEXT software and compilers were. You could compile once for multi hardware platforms. And..those people..work at apple now. But, I would think apple might want to avoid this...as it would certainly take time out from a fast and smooth OS X adoption which is job one right now. And nobody is gonna buy an apple laptop if it has a 30 min battery life..and burns a hole in your table. So, if I had to guess here..Id say...if worse comes to worse (and it looks like it might)...IBM has already laid out an altivec, 4 core chip thats more than capable of taking care of the mhz gap (gulf). And, further, my guess would be..they are hard at work on a low power, low heat..version of said chip for laptop applications ( I think they already have one). Once all that's in place....apples agreement/contract with MOTO runs out this fall..and apple has ..as S Jobs put it .."options". btw: that case against Intel..iby 5 individuals seems like a looser to me. Unless somebody knows where they can find a 3 ghz PIII to prove their case. (because that's what PIV's are running at today). Intel will bring in their latest chip and bench it against the 1.2 ghz PIII (the last one they had). If they want to go back..and show 1.2 pIV agasint III...then all Intel has to do is run any multimedia bench mark to show the IV is faster (which is was). End of case. Maybe they will just pay the guys a few grand so it doesn't go to court..just to avoid the hassle. OR...just offer to give each of them a PIV 3ghz to settle out of court...with a hush agreement. Anyway you look at it..this case isn't gonna go very far.