acn wrote to The Millionaire <=-

I used to have an iPhone 4 and loved it - until iOS 7 came out and
made it absolutely unusable. I walked to an official Apple Store and
asked how I could revert to iOS 6, they said "it's impossible" - and I walked out of the shop, right into another shop and bought a Galaxy
S4.
Since then, I'm using Android, which also has its rough edges, but did
not cripple my devices (yet). And the devices I bought were 'open
enough' that I could install alternative systems.

I had the best of both worlds for a time. Work paid for a nice iPhone 6s
with a good amount of storage, but I started playing with an old Samsung S3 and liked the promise that Android had back then. Then, I was laid off, returned the iPhone and switched to the S3 permanently.

I love the ecosystem, being able to pick apps, root the device, run Linux on it if I really wanted to, and even ran a third party Android distro for a while (LineageOS).

My son is 18, all of his friends have Android. My daughter is 12, and all of her friends have iPhones. Weird. It's a problem because her friends want to FaceTime with her, and I don't know of a kid in her class running Android. I guess that's exactly as Apple planned...

I also loved my old PowerBook G4 that I bought many years ago and the
iMac 21" from 2010 - but here Apple also crippled the system and dumbed-down everything (I loved Apple Pages until it could not even
read its own old documents correctly after a major update), so I
installed Linux on the iMac and used it for some years as a Linux
system. That was my last Apple computer.

Regards,
Anna

--- OpenXP 5.0.51
* Origin: Imzadi Box Point (21:3/127.1)

... ONE OUT OF FIVE DENTISTS RECOMMEND GUM.
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
* Origin: realitycheckBBS.org -- information is power. (21:4/122)

Nightfox wrote to 2twisty <=-

Re: Re: Hackintosh
By: 2twisty to Nightfox on Wed Apr 20 2022 11:12 am

Jobs put an end to that due to quality issues with the clones, and his desire to control the entire user experience.

What quality issues did the clones have?

They were leaking money from Apple. :)

I remember the hornet's nest stirred up when Steve Jobs came back, cancelled the clone licenses and killed off the Newton. There were avid fan bases of both.


... Magnify the most difficult details
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
* Origin: realitycheckBBS.org -- information is power. (21:4/122)

Am 20.04.22 schrieb Nightfox@21:1/137 in FSX_GEN:

Hallo Nightfox,

Jobs put an end to that due to quality issues with the clones, and his 2t>> desire to control the entire user experience.

What quality issues did the clones have?

As far as I know, they were more powerful and less expensive than the comparable Apple machines.

Regards,
Anna

--- OpenXP 5.0.51
* Origin: Imzadi Box Point (21:3/127.1)

Re: Re: Hackintosh
By: Spectre to Nightfox on Thu Apr 21 2022 07:08 am

They could but to this point they don't appear to be reinventing the wheel, just optimising it. I believe, and once again I can't quote this, it was all over the place for a while... Apple merely optimised the support chips and layout adding cache and memory to the die. Decreasing the fab from 16nm to 5nm process.

So better efficiency, lower power consumption. Otherwise basically the same bits and pieces as any other ARM processor with support chips.

From my understanding, that's basically how the ARM model works. Companies license the ARM processor designs, then they can either just make the ARM processor as is or add onto it according to their needs. Apple seems to have done that with their M1 processor.

Nightfox
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Win32
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digdist.synchro.net (21:1/137)

Re: Re: Hackintosh
By: Spectre to Nightfox on Thu Apr 21 2022 07:21 am

The first thing Jobs does on his return is eliminate the clone licensing, why give them the tools to defeat you on your own turf. They're more

I always thought that was an interesting attitude. Apple seems to be more concerned with making and selling the physical devices rather than bringing income from their software. Microsoft became successful making money from their software licensing, including their operating systems. Apple could probably have done the same by allowing the clone manufacturers to exist and also perhaps by selling their Mac OS (and perhaps allowing Mac OS to be installed on any non-Apple PC). But Apple has not chosen that route. They're all about controlling both the hardware and software.

Nightfox
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Win32
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digdist.synchro.net (21:1/137)

Re: Re: Hackintosh
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Nightfox on Thu Apr 21 2022 06:15 am

What quality issues did the clones have?

They were leaking money from Apple. :)

I remember the hornet's nest stirred up when Steve Jobs came back, cancelled the clone licenses and killed off the Newton. There were avid fan bases of both.

The Mac clones seemed interesting back in the day. They looked somewhere in between a PC and a Mac and were able to run Mac OS just like a regular Mac. The interesting thing was, I think many of them tended to use more standard ports & such, like a regular VGA port for the monitor rather than Apple's proprietary monitor port (which was compatible with VGA - I've seen adapters for Apple's monitor port that have a standard VGA port so you can use any monitor).

Nightfox
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Win32
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digdist.synchro.net (21:1/137)

Re: Re: Hackintosh
By: acn to Nightfox on Thu Apr 21 2022 04:08 pm

Jobs put an end to that due to quality issues with the clones, and
his desire to control the entire user experience.

What quality issues did the clones have?

As far as I know, they were more powerful and less expensive than the comparable Apple machines.

Those don't sound like quality issues. ;)

Nightfox
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Win32
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digdist.synchro.net (21:1/137)

Re: Re: Hackintosh
By: Spectre to 2twisty on Thu Apr 21 2022 07:26 am

...and you still can, via emulation. The M1 is powerful enough to
emulate x86-64.

Its got Rosetta built into the CPU silicon. It can out perform any intel powered mac using this translation layer while only managing ~80% of native chip performance.

It's in the CPU itself? That would mean it could translate x86 to ARM fairly efficiently and transparently. Would that also mean that you could potentially install an x86-compatible OS (such as Windows) and have it appear to run "natively" on it?

I'm a bit surprised, since the previous incarnation of Rosetta (when Apple switched from PowerPC to Intel) was a piece of software that was installed on Mac OS X.

Nightfox
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Win32
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digdist.synchro.net (21:1/137)

On 21 Apr 2022 at 09:45a, Nightfox pondered and said...

...and you still can, via emulation. The M1 is powerful enough to
emulate x86-64.

Its got Rosetta built into the CPU silicon. It can out perform any in powered mac using this translation layer while only managing ~80% of native chip performance.

It's in the CPU itself?

No.

That would mean it could translate x86 to ARM
fairly efficiently and transparently. Would that also mean that you
could potentially install an x86-compatible OS (such as Windows) and
have it appear to run "natively" on it?

Rosetta 2 is software that does binary translating from
x86 instructions to ARM. It is a software component. It
does not support e.g. booting Windows natively.

I'm a bit surprised, since the previous incarnation of Rosetta (when
Apple switched from PowerPC to Intel) was a piece of software that was installed on Mac OS X.

Rosetta 2 is similar.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

Re: Re: Hackintosh
By: tenser to Nightfox on Fri Apr 22 2022 08:59 am

Its got Rosetta built into the CPU silicon. It can out perform

It's in the CPU itself?

No.

Rosetta 2 is software that does binary translating from
x86 instructions to ARM. It is a software component. It
does not support e.g. booting Windows natively.

That's what I thought initially. I had done some reading about it online and it sounded like it was a software component, like the original Rosetta, and not actually in the M1 processor itself.

Nightfox
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Win32
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digdist.synchro.net (21:1/137)

From my understanding, that's basically how the ARM model works.

The only real difference, was Apple to all the parts and redesigned/optimised in house, and thus far aren't sharing. As is their way

Spec


*** THE READER V4.50 [freeware]
--- SuperBBS v1.17-3 (Eval)
* Origin: The future's uncertain, the end is always near. (21:3/101)

I always thought that was an interesting attitude. Apple seems to be more

Sculley had some odd thoughts about trying to make a system for each niche, until they had the market confused with to many offerings that didn't have sufficient turnover of any particular model.

Jobs cut it all back and streamlined it, went more the Henry Ford model, you can have whatever you want so long as its this one, I think is best for you.

bringing income from their software. Microsoft became successful making money from their software licensing, including their operating systems.

Thats because of their target market though. When IBM created the PC and XT they basically just gave it away, anyone could make copies of it. There's not much value trying to compete in a budget hardware space. They have dabbled in hardware, SoftCard was an example of that, a Z80 CP/M card for the Apple II.

There also wasn't a lot of point trying to out manouver Apple on their own operating system either.

Spec


*** THE READER V4.50 [freeware]
--- SuperBBS v1.17-3 (Eval)
* Origin: The future's uncertain, the end is always near. (21:3/101)

That's what I thought initially. I had done some reading about it
online and it sounded like it was a software component, like the
original Rosetta, and not actually in the M1 processor itself.

IIRC, Rosetta (1) did real-time instruction translation every time you ran the app. Rosetta (2) does the translation ONCE and stores some kind of translated binary on the filesystem.

This allows for Rosetta (2) to run apps much quicker once the translation has happened.

Not 100% sure of this, but I thought I read/saw that somewhere when the M1 came out.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
* Origin: The Ratrace Losers (21:3/166)

Re: Re: Hackintosh
By: Spectre to Nightfox on Fri Apr 22 2022 10:43 am

I always thought that was an interesting attitude. Apple seems to
be more

Sculley had some odd thoughts about trying to make a system for each niche, until they had the market confused with to many offerings that didn't have sufficient turnover of any particular model.

I was actually referring to Jobs eliminating the clones, and Apple's desire to make both the hardware and the software. But it was a bit weird that Apple had so many different models in the 90s.

bringing income from their software. Microsoft became successful
making money from their software licensing, including their
operating systems.

Thats because of their target market though. When IBM created the PC and XT they basically just gave it away, anyone could make copies of it. There's not much value trying to compete in a budget hardware space.

I thought I had heard that IBM originally didn't want other companies to make copies of it. I'd heard other companies reverse-engineered the IBM BIOS used in their PC in order to make clones, and that IBM had some lawsuits against the other companies, but IBM lost.

There also wasn't a lot of point trying to out manouver Apple on their own operating system either.

MS-DOS came out before Apple's Mac OS (and I think even the Lisa OS) though.

Nightfox
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Win32
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digdist.synchro.net (21:1/137)

Re: Re: Hackintosh
By: 2twisty to Nightfox on Thu Apr 21 2022 07:32 pm

That's what I thought initially. I had done some reading about it
online and it sounded like it was a software component, like the
original Rosetta, and not actually in the M1 processor itself.

IIRC, Rosetta (1) did real-time instruction translation every time you ran the app. Rosetta (2) does the translation ONCE and stores some kind of translated binary on the filesystem.

This allows for Rosetta (2) to run apps much quicker once the translation has happened.

Not 100% sure of this, but I thought I read/saw that somewhere when the M1 came out.

Yeah, I was reading about it again, and it sounds like the new Rosetta translates an x86 app for the M1 and then stores a cached copy of the M1 version so it doesn't have to translate it again.

Nightfox
--- SBBSecho 3.15-Win32
* Origin: Digital Distortion: digdist.synchro.net (21:1/137)

It's in the CPU itself? That would mean it could translate x86 to ARM fairly efficiently and transparently. Would that also mean that you could potentially install an x86-compatible OS (such as Windows) and have it appear to run "natively" on it?

One supposes so, but you'd need a boot loader probably, enough native ARM
code to get it booted, enable the translation and then start loading Windoze
or other. I think... but I'm not 100% that I've heard reference to running Windoze itself inside OSX... Looks like I was wrong about it being in the silicon though.. I can only see reference to it as part of OSX now.

Spec


*** THE READER V4.50 [freeware]
--- SuperBBS v1.17-3 (Eval)
* Origin: The future's uncertain, the end is always near. (21:3/101)

As a quick aside, I've never bought a windoze license in my life.

Sculley had some odd thoughts about trying to make a system for each niche, until they had the market confused with to many offerings that didn't have sufficient turnover of any particular model.

I was actually referring to Jobs eliminating the clones, and Apple's desire to make both the hardware and the software. But it was a bit weird that Apple had so many different models in the 90s.

The two things are related... the clones were a licensing income stream to
help support the fact that Apple was producing to much inventory. The
drastic rationalisation of models, and the cutting of the clones at the same time, brings all the business home into better defined channels at least as
far as Apple is concerned.

Jobs model was always to maintain control over the whole box and dice. He was trying to sell you a complete solution this is our way, this is how it works. Take it or leave it.


*** THE READER V4.50 [freeware]
--- SuperBBS v1.17-3 (Eval)
* Origin: The future's uncertain, the end is always near. (21:3/101)