Apple Keeps x86 Torch Lit with ‘Marklar’
Sources said more than a dozen software engineers are tasked to Marklar, and the company’s mainstream Mac OS X team is regularly asked to modify code to address bugs that crop up when compiling the OS for x86. Build numbers keep pace with those of their pre-release PowerPC counterparts; for example, Apple is internally running a complete, x86-compatible version of Jaguar, a k a Mac OS X 10.2, which shipped last week.
Wade spotted this one.
Here’s my plan:
Apple creates an “OS X86″ that runs on Wintel-compatibles and, using Virtual PC, runs Windows, too (you’ve got to wean users away from their current software). You could run this the other way around — OS X86 under Virtual PC for Windows — but I digress.
Apple could then sell OS X to anybody & everybody. Why does Apple have to be the exclusive vendor of hardware that runs their OS? (Even Microsoft may yet produce branded PCs, according to rumors.) Apple could simply offer some of the *best* PCs available. The BMWs of the PC world, if you will. There is a precedent for high-end PCs: Alienware, for example.
Many users would not switch to x86 right away because they run PowerPC software, so Apple’s PPC hardware sales wouldn’t immediately dry up even if their new x86 models were faster.
I’ve said this all before, but I still think the above concept is viable, even moreso now that open source software enthusiasts are adopting OS X.
Software developers would jump on the Cocoa train if they knew their market were poised for a huge expansion. Besides, Apple has the influence (read “cash”) to encourage Cocoa development. (Perhaps Marklar is already running inside skunk works at Adobe and a few other major developers?)
Carbonized PPC apps could be supported using emulation. Apple did quite well with the platform switch from 68K to PowerPC. I see no technical reason why they can’t do it again.
If I worked at Apple, I’d be smuggling x86 installers out and upgrading all the display models at Circuit City. Woo hoo . . . !!
I agree that Apple could sell their own PPC hardware while selling the OS for compatible PCs. I have also been factoring in the 68k -> PPC migration into my thinking: I was doing desktop support at the time and it was simply amazing how seamlessly that was handled. It didn’t just sorta work nor was it geared toward some select subset of applications: it worked with everything. I think they could do that again . . . .
Nothing wrong with having options: if it turns the heat up on Motorola, that’s OK.
[Tech note to Paul: the comment count was OBO and my personal info had been forgotten.]
Intel has so many more resources than Motorola, and is very motivated by AMD. I don’t see how Moto can catch up, much less get ahead. But breakthroughs happen, sometimes.
Also… Apple should consider purchasing Connectix so they can own the Virtual PC technology. Or will that just start a death spiral for VPC?
Oops, disregard the note about my personal info being forgotten. I had erased my cookies.
Perhaps Motorola is coming in for more heat than they deserve. It would be interesting to see Marklar next to Jaguar on the hottest systems possible and see how they perform. If the difference between PPC and x86 is negligible in terms of Real Work, that would be worth knowing. Likewise, if a PIII/P4 smokes the G4, that would be interesting. I would assume Moto and Intel would love to see the Marklar vs Jaguar cage match.
I would assume Moto OR Intel would love to see the Marklar vs Jaguar cage match. There is only likely to be one winner.
What are the rules? Highest availble clock speed of each chip? Do prices matter? Apple would say to run 2 PPCs against a Pentium.