A short story (I'm back!)

PPC_Digger · Post by **PPC_Digger** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 8:09 pm

Here is a short story:
One day, on the 22nd of July, 2004, I registered to a forum called E-Maculation.
Time has passed, things were looking good.
A little over a year later, I stopped participating in the forum.
Then, on the 21st of December, 2005, I saw a message in another forum about the release of PearPC 0.4, I decided that it was time to return to E-Maculation. And here I am.

Anyway, I'm back. It's good to be here once again.

Stephen Coates · Post by **Stephen Coates** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 11:09 pm

At least that's another returned member.

These forums wern't as good as they were back in 2003 and 2004. There's not as many people here.

Perhaps if I send every user a happy new year email on 1st january then it will remind people about the forums.

PPC_Digger · Post by **PPC_Digger** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 5:48 pm

Stephen Coates wrote:At least that's another returned member.

These forums wern't as good as they were back in 2003 and 2004. There's not as many people here.

Perhaps if I send every user a happy new year email on 1st january then it will remind people about the forums.

Yes, I remember when replies came after less than 30 minutes. Something needs to be done to bring back the glory.

Post by **ClockWise** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 6:09 am

It's my fault. I haven't paid attention since I started teaching. Teaching is a busy job, as it turns out.

Marc · Post by **Marc** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:36 am

It's not your fault.

I think the MacIntel thing has pushed Macintosh emulation into the background.

Stephen Coates · Post by **Stephen Coates** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:21 am

The MacIntel should make people want to get PPC and 68k emulators.

Or would it be possible to run your 68k apps on a MacIntel without an emulator?

Mac Emu · Post by **Mac Emu** » Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:54 am

I heard Classic wouldn't be supported on MacIntels, nevermind 68k. But I'm certain the open source Macintosh emulators will eventually be ported over, giving us access to running our older Mac software on the new IntelMacs (Intel Developing Next-Generation Power Mac for Apple?)

Marc · Post by **Marc** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 5:29 pm

Stephen Coates wrote:The MacIntel should make people want to get PPC and 68k emulators.

Or would it be possible to run your 68k apps on a MacIntel without an emulator?

See my post entitled the classic mac os is dead. Sheepshaver will no doubt take off in a big way on MacIntel systems as classic won't work.

However my point was that it pushes the likes of PearPC out of the news. Remember when PearPC was launched and there was a massive buzz on the scene. If MacIntel hadn't happened, then I'm sure this site would be full of posts about 0.4. As it is, PearPC isn't the big sotry it once was, and I can only attribute this massive drop in hype around it to MacIntel.

Stephen Coates · Post by **Stephen Coates** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 5:53 pm

But remember that sheepshaver doesn't run MacOSX, so PearPC would be needed for that.

Unless SS was updated so it did support OSX.

It's funny how quiet this forum is now. Remember when PearPC was introduced, there were people posting every 2 minutes!

I think EMaculation is going back to a BII /SS board now as we don't get much PearPC posts anymore.

robojam · Post by **robojam** » Sun Jan 01, 2006 5:55 am

I think Classic is going to be the mainstay of the forum once we get our hands on MacIntel machines. However, I'm sure there's going to be a lot of people who have PCs but can't afford a Mac as well.

Marc · Post by **Marc** » Sun Jan 01, 2006 6:49 pm

Stephen Coates wrote:But remember that sheepshaver doesn't run MacOSX, so PearPC would be needed for that.

Unless SS was updated so it did support OSX.

I meant that SS would be needed on MacIntel systems as a replacement for Classic.

Stephen Coates · Post by **Stephen Coates** » Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:24 pm

And I meant that sheepshaver doesn't run macosx, therefore, if it were to run on OSx86, then powerpc osx stuff wouldn't be usable in sheepshaver, however macos 9 and 8 stuff would.

Marc · Post by **Marc** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 2:24 am

Stephen Coates wrote:And I meant that sheepshaver doesn't run macosx, therefore, if it were to run on OSx86, then powerpc osx stuff wouldn't be usable in sheepshaver, however macos 9 and 8 stuff would.

...so then it would be a replacement for the classic environment which isn't included in OSx86.

I think we're getting wires crossed somewhere here...

Marc · Post by **Marc** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 2:26 am

Stephen Coates wrote:And I meant that sheepshaver doesn't run macosx, therefore, if it were to run on OSx86, then powerpc osx stuff wouldn't be usable in sheepshaver, however macos 9 and 8 stuff would.

PowerPC OSX apps work in OSx86 using the Rosetta emulation layer anyway

Stephen Coates · Post by **Stephen Coates** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 11:17 am

Oh! I forgot that OSX/PPC apps worked with OSx86.

When you said classic I thought you would mean the OSX/PPC and earlier.

Marc · Post by **Marc** » Tue Jan 03, 2006 1:19 pm

Stephen Coates wrote:Oh! I forgot that OSX/PPC apps worked with OSx86.

When you said classic I thought you would mean the OSX/PPC and earlier.

No worries mate.

Apparantly Rosetta is also being improved to include altivec emulation for the release version of OSx86. (the dev releases are only a G3 emulator). So it looks like the major hope of keeping the emulation scene interesting is once again SheepShaver, or else a version of PearPC which can run transparently using the host x86 CPU (a-la MacOnLinux) when the x86 version of OSX is released to the public. Perhaps even MacOnLinux will ported to x86?