Marklar - x86 OS X

eWeek just came out with an article claiming that Apple has a feature-complete version of OS X running on x86 architecture that is codenamed Marklar.

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,496270,00.asp

It pulls together a lot of older rumors and Star Trek history, but has a few new interesting tidbits.

- Ash

so basically all i got from this is that it's a "fall-back plan" if motorola and ibm refuse to make chips for apple and they can't find anyone else to do it either.

And Nick de Plume is a reliable source since when? :rolleyes:

So I will be 40 when Apple decides to release OS 11 according to Jobs who says that OS X is the OS for the next 15 years. A lot can happen in that time. This would definitely allow enough time to develop a commercial release of OS X for the x86 if Motorola and/or IBM fail to deliver for Apple. Though they have a version of OS X running on an x86 platform, the article makes the point of mentioning the amount of effort it would take by 3rd party vendors to rebuild software and hardware for Mac OS X running on x86. Also, Apple would have to figure out their closed architecture on the x86 platform if they opted to maintain their closed archictecture model. We won't see it any time soon, but maybe in a couple of years.

Now all they have to do is sell empty PowerMac towers.

"Marklar" must be Klingon for "Isn't gonna happen."

Originally posted by MacCoaster
And Nick de Plume is a reliable source since when? :rolleyes:

i personally do not know nick de plume, but i do read thinksecret regularly... i have to say most of the stuff he writes (rumor-wise) is reliable

his site seems to be one of the more respectable rumors sites (besides MR of course :))

from http://www.slangsite.com/slang/M.html :

marklar:
A noun standing in place of any noun you have temporarily forgotten. Synonym of thingy, thingumbob, whatsit. Also may be used deliberately when the meaning is abundantly clear anyway. Derived from its use by space aliens in an episode of South Park
Example: On Marklar, everyone and every thing is referred to as marklar. We come in marklar. Take us to your marklar.

Not a bad little article but seems like all they did in the way of research is look through a bunch of rumors sites.

There's one bit that I found interesting:

Apple would have to also coax most of its third-party developers to rewrite their applications from the ground up in the company's Cocoa application environment.

If that's all that it takes to make an app x86-compatible, then the whole switching-over-to-Intel thing doesn't seem so farfetched. Yes, most OS X apps now are Carbon but won't developers be switching to Cocoa anyways as they introduce new apps? I've only dabbled with the development tools but Cocoa seems to be the way to go if you're writing a brand new app for OS X.

Originally posted by dongmin
... Yes, most OS X apps now are Carbon but won't developers be switching to Cocoa anyways as they introduce new apps? ...

When they write an application in Cocoa, it will only run on OS X, not on a classic Mac OS. That might cut out half their customers today. I think Carbon will be around for several years, in the consumer applications. Now high end products are a different story. Nobody would want to run Shake on OS 9 anyway.

Originally posted by snoopy

When they write an application in Cocoa, it will only run on OS X, not on a classic Mac OS. That might cut out half their customers today. I think Carbon will be around for several years, in the consumer applications. Now high end products are a different story. Nobody would want to run Shake on OS 9 anyway.

I didn't mean now, obviously, as the great majority of Mac users still boot off OS 9. But in 3 years let's say, I would think that 90% or more would be running OS X.