Neowin Forums > Running Mac OS X on x86 PC!

Atoner

May 11 2004, 21:52

Quote - (the evn show @ May 11 2004, 21:50)

he iso has always been compressed for as long I've been a member of ADC. What's the big deal - the image is compressed (ISO files aren't compressed so it makes sense to zip it up).

just unzip the thing.

Oh, I did unzip it. That wasn't the problem -- I just thought it hadn't been a GZ when I pulled it down last night, but as I said, it is entirely possible I am on crack.

-A-

cooldude7273

May 11 2004, 22:05

can anyone translate that documentation into normal english for us non super-nerds?

Trek234

May 11 2004, 22:43

Quote - (Starman @ May 11 2004, 16:21)

This project WILL DIE

Bye bye, PearPC.

Mike

Nope. It's not the emulators fault if YOU violate a software license. Again, courts have already decided that.

There is nothing illegal about the emulator its self. Now can you DO something illegal with it? Sure.

I can use Microsoft outlook for "evil" if I wanted to. So is it Microsofts fault if I do that? Nope.

Trek234

May 11 2004, 22:48

Quote - (Starman @ May 11 2004, 16:41)

I am using my brain. If this software allows users to violate Apple's license agreement, they have every right to shut it down.

Why is everyone so f*cking obnoxious?

Mike

My god man go take a legal course after you graduate grade school.

So if software MIGHT allow you to violate a license agreement, X company has every right to shut you down? Well, I guess we can say bye bye to EVERY CD/DVD recording software. Say bye bye to any DVD playing software. Oh! Better say bye to Microsoft Word also! I MIGHT use it in order to reproduce a copyrighted book don't ya know.

These arguments have already been tried in court by Sony and Nintendo. Guess what? The courts ruled against them. This matter has already been decided.

It's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. If I steal your car and use it to flee after a robbery, is it your fault because I used your car to do something wrong? Not blood likely.

This coming from the guy who 24 hours ago was not aware of what a patent was. (or if he was for some reason believed they only applied to apple rather than pc hardware)

Trek234

May 11 2004, 22:56

Quote - (Starman @ May 11 2004, 17:12)

It's NOT?

So you're saying that Microsoft packages up a DVD builder? A Movie Editor (Movie Maker isn't even close to the same league)? A Photo Manager? Gee....I don't have them.

MIke

So? Get a job and buy the software.

Trek234

May 11 2004, 22:58

Quote - (Starman @ May 11 2004, 17:14)

Because people don't seem to understand the details of this project and why Apple WILL come down on it AND have the right to do so.

There's more to it than just emulating the PPC.

Mike

How do you know Apple will initiate litigation?

First of all are you aware working macintosh emulators (some which were sold for profit) have existed for YEARS? Back in OS 6-9 days you could emulate OS 1-8.1 near PERFECTLY. Apple never did a damn thing. Why is it different now?

Second - do you know what the word "precedent" means? The courts have ruled before when Sony and Nintendo tried to take action against emulators that emulators are PERFECTLY LEGAL so long as they don't directly use copyrighted code.

So tell me - how exactly will Apple have better standing in court over Sony and Nintendo? You are aware the law must be applied equally to all people/corporations, right?

evn.

May 11 2004, 23:00

Quote - (Trek234 @ May 11 2004, 16:48)

My god man go take a legal course after you graduate grade school.

The DMCA is almost that frightening. Apple could rot-13 their install CDs, and add a call to open firmware that rot-13s them again when they're read. That would be enough to count as encryption, and then they can slam the DMCA on you. If they wanted to be extra anal you could find yourself in court for violating an EULA that specifically forbids the installation of Mac OS X on anything except Apple hardware. There are countries where these things actually hold up (Apple's is actually a fairly easy read so you might not even be able to pull the 'it's too complicated' defense if their lawyers are as good as we all think they are).

I bought a DVD copy of hero (imported) a few months ago.
I want to watch it at school on my notebook with some friends between classes, but I don't want to bring it with me. So I decide to rip it.

Using DeCSS to remove the encyption so that I can re-encode the movie in MPEG-4 is not legal (if I were in America) because circumvent encryption/copy protection. Likewise it's illegal for sites hosted in America to traffic in that sort of software.

Stupid? yes.
legal? sadly.

That same law could bring a little hell on neowin based in America for linking to programs like that (remember the mess of sites that caught C&D and other legal notices for linking to DeCSS source code those few years ago?) Of course that just pushes this sort of program out of the USA - but there is always the potential for liability as long as it's on the books. Even if 'the good guys' win it can still be an extremely costly battle which everyone loses - except the lawyers.

Try writing your congressman or if you're not 18, explain the issue to your parents and have them bash out a 2 paragraph letter that voices your concerns. Politicians still understand dead trees - so use that to your advantage if you want to do something about this (IMO) crazy state of affairs.

Liquid

May 11 2004, 23:01

Can this thing read .nrg?

Trek234

May 11 2004, 23:03

Quote - (Starman @ May 11 2004, 17:29)

Uh, no, because there's nothing in the Windows license agreement that says that you have to use MS-branded hardware. DID I SAY THAT? NO.

Mike

Get this - license agreements do NOT override civil law. It doesn't matter what a license agreement says if it is conflict with state or federal law. Your license agreement can say you surrender your right to a quick and speedy trial forever after you install it. Doesn't mean it has any basis in reality.

The fact is the courts have already decided the issue making any contrary point in a license agreement null and void.

Your argument is that license agreements somehow carry more weight than the judgement of a court of law. Get this - THEY DON'T!

Starman

May 11 2004, 23:05

Quote - (Trek234 @ May 11 2004, 18:56)

So? Get a job and buy the software.

I already bought DVD Studio Pro, Final Cut Pro, and Photoshop.

Bet you weren't expecting THAT answer, were ya?

Mike

Starman

May 11 2004, 23:08

Quote - (Trek234 @ May 11 2004, 18:58)

How do you know Apple will initiate litigation?

First of all are you aware working macintosh emulators (some which were sold for profit) have existed for YEARS? Back in OS 6-9 days you could emulate OS 1-8.1 near PERFECTLY. Apple never did a damn thing. Why is it different now?

Second - do you know what the word "precedent" means? The courts have ruled before when Sony and Nintendo tried to take action against emulators that emulators are PERFECTLY LEGAL so long as they don't directly use copyrighted code.

So tell me - how exactly will Apple have better standing in court over Sony and Nintendo? You are aware the law must be applied equally to all people/corporations, right?

Because you had to go out and get the ROMs yourself.

In fact, if you check out this site:

http://www.emulators.com/softmac.htm

It says:

Quote -

IMPORTANT: All versions of SoftMac and Fusion PC require that you provide a valid Macintosh ROM BIOS (which all Macintosh computers use to start booting) and a valid Mac OS startup disk. Without these two items, and emulator will not boot or work, just as a real Macintosh computer cannot work without these items. You should download the free SoftMac XP or Fusion PC release to verify that you have the necessary ROM BIOS and Mac OS before purchasing a more advanced SoftMac release.

All users of Mac emulators fall into one of 3 categories. You should determine exactly which of the 3 categories applies to you, and this will determine whether you need to purchase a ROM card and/or ROMs, or whether you can use SoftMac entirely without any additional hardware. The 3 categories are:

You do not currently own a Macintosh computer of any kind. You will have to purchase our ROM card and a set of Macintosh ROMs and use that hardware inside your PC. You will likely also need to purchase Mac OS and other Macintosh software.

You do own a Macintosh computer, but one that is not functioning. You will need to purchase our ROM card and you will have the option to then install your computer's ROMs into the ROM card. In effect, transferring the functionality of your Macintosh computer into your PC. Only specific Macintosh ROMs are supported by the ROM card, so please consult our Macintosh ROM Chart to verify that you have the correct ROMs.

You do own a Macintosh computer that is functioning. You may be able to simply create a ROM image of your Macintosh's BIOS by running a small utility on your Macintosh. Again, please consult the Macintosh ROM Chart to verify that your ROMs are supported as ROM images. SoftMac currently supports over 30 different Macintosh ROM BIOS versions that are used in dozens of different models of Macintosh computers and we are adding support for new BIOS versions every month.

*GASP*

So basically, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Mike

Starman

May 11 2004, 23:11

Installing OS X server now. Installing fine, 5h38m left.

Mike

Jackalo

May 11 2004, 23:14

Starman, your signature image is just screaming Michael Jackson.

Trek234

May 11 2004, 23:16

Quote - (the evn show @ May 11 2004, 23:00)

The DMCA is almost that frightening. Apple could rot-13 their install CDs, and add a call to open firmware that rot-13s them again when they're read. That would be enough to count as encryption, and then they can slam the DMCA on you. If they wanted to be extra anal you could find yourself in court for violating an EULA that specifically forbids the installation of Mac OS X on anything except Apple hardware. There are countries where these things actually hold up (Apple's is actually a fairly easy read so you might not even be able to pull the 'it's too complicated' defense if their lawyers are as good as we all think they are).

I bought a DVD copy of hero (imported) a few months ago.
I want to watch it at school on my notebook with some friends between classes, but I don't want to bring it with me. So I decide to rip it.

Using DeCSS to remove the encyption so that I can re-encode the movie in MPEG-4 is not legal (if I were in America) because circumvent encryption/copy protection. Likewise it's illegal for sites hosted in America to traffic in that sort of software.

Stupid? yes.
legal? sadly.

That same law could bring a little hell on neowin based in America for linking to programs like that (remember the mess of sites that caught C&D and other legal notices for linking to DeCSS source code those few years ago?) Of course that just pushes this sort of program out of the USA - but there is always the potential for liability as long as it's on the books. Even if 'the good guys' win it can still be an extremely costly battle which everyone loses - except the lawyers.

Try writing your congressman or if you're not 18, explain the issue to your parents and have them bash out a 2 paragraph letter that voices your concerns. Politicians still understand dead trees - so use that to your advantage if you want to do something about this (IMO) crazy state of affairs.

<sigh> I am aware of copyright law. The fact of the matter is courts have ruled that under current law emulators themselves are NOT illegal.

If you bring in copyrighted code written by say Apple then yes, that is another matter. The point is, however, it is not the fault of the emu authors if users use the software illegally.

No site has been brought down for linking to emulators either. I visit several mainstream emulation sites that link to every emulator under the sun (and even host most of them on their own domain). They have never had legal trouble so long as they don't go around posting copyrighted code.

Bringing up unrelated matters (DVD encryption for instance) doesn't change the fact that under law emulators themselves are legal. Two different matters with two unique and different court precedents.

Trek234

May 11 2004, 23:17

Quote - (Starman @ May 11 2004, 23:05)

I already bought DVD Studio Pro, Final Cut Pro, and Photoshop.

Bet you weren't expecting THAT answer, were ya?

Mike

No I wasn't... If you already bought the software then why are you complaining that Microsoft doesn't include it free for you?

zkorpio

May 11 2004, 23:17

"Almost" worked for me, It was fun though... When opening the desktop, the menu bar and the finder window that opens keeps like refreshing...? it goes on and off and never stops... so basicaly I can't do anything; also when mouse over the dock bar it does the same.

I'm using Windows XP SP1... both "win32 jitc" and the "win32 generic" does the same thing... but "win32 jitc" loads faster.

What changes on the configuration file would be any good....?

oik

May 11 2004, 23:20

i'll bet 80% of you people using pearpc are using illegal copies of osx too...

nuka_t

May 11 2004, 23:22

would you expect them to buy a retail copy?

Trek234

May 11 2004, 23:22

Quote - (Starman @ May 11 2004, 23:08)

Because you had to go out and get the ROMs yourself.

In fact, if you check out this site:

http://www.emulators.com/softmac.htm

It says:

*GASP*

So basically, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Mike

<sigh> Playstation emulators require you use a Playstation BIOS. Guess what? When sony took them to court the courts said it DOES NOT MATTER. That's why Playstation emulators are in full swing right now and Sony has stopped their legal initiatives against them. You can only lose so many times.

It's also nice that you skirted around the issue. Odd, I didn't need to use a mac ROM to run this emulator. Nice straw man though.

Hey guess what? Those emulators that DO need mac roms have been around for AT LEAST 10 years. Apple has done nothing. (and they actually emulated the mac near perfectly!) I'm still waiting for you to tell me how you know Apple will act with this in mind. 10 years is a pretty long time. What's taking them so long? Uh oh, hope the statue of limitations hasn't set in.... (you know, the principle of law that mandates legal action be taken within a limited period of time)

Trek234

May 11 2004, 23:24

dupe sorry

oik

May 11 2004, 23:28

Quote - (nuka_t @ May 11 2004, 23:22)

would you expect them to buy a retail copy?

since this would probably be the main thing that would stop apple from smushing this under it's legal (or technical) thumb, yes.

apple can make a great deal of money if people bought the os. but if you all just use pirated copies, then apple's not gonna give a ****. they can go the legal route or the tech route and then *poof* pearpc no longer works.

oik

May 11 2004, 23:31

Quote - (Trek234 @ May 11 2004, 23:22)

Hey guess what? Those emulators that DO need mac roms have been around for AT LEAST 10 years. Apple has done nothing. (and they actually emulated the mac near perfectly!) I'm still waiting for you to tell me how you know Apple will act with this in mind. 10 years is a pretty long time. What's taking them so long? Uh oh, hope the statue of limitations hasn't set in.... (you know, the principle of law that mandates legal action be taken within a limited period of time)

apple will go on this one because it runs osx. notice how all the others run everything BUT osx? this is their flagship os. you do not know as much as you would like us to think you do, run along now.

Trek234

May 11 2004, 23:32

Quote - (oik @ May 11 2004, 23:28)

since this would probably be the main thing that would stop apple from smushing this under it's legal (or technical) thumb, yes.

apple can make a great deal of money if people bought the os. but if you all just use pirated copies, then apple's not gonna give a ****. they can go the legal route or the tech route and then *poof* pearpc no longer works.

Seems like a moot point of people are "using" pirated copys at the moment. Wow, I got to the desktop before a major crash! Whoopdeedo.

Key thing to remember about emulators: Most of the time they are for novelty more than anything else. Does a single person on this thread who has used the emu done so with intent to actually USE it for something? No, it's just fun to screw around with in your free time. "Oh look I got to the OS X desktop on my PC at 2FPS! Yay!" well back to Windows I go.

Trek234

May 11 2004, 23:34

Quote - (oik @ May 11 2004, 23:31)

apple will go on this one because it runs osx. notice how all the others run everything BUT osx? this is their flagship os. you do not know as much as you would like us to think you do, run along now.

Umm you don't get it do you? When the older emulators were around OS X didn't even exist. It probably wasn't even conceived of yet.

When those emulators were around OS 6, 7, 8 were top of the line newest mac OS's. (like OS X is today)

Apple did nothing.

When this emulator actually emulates OS X in a useable form OS X will be like OS 8 is today. (in the "Who gives a damn" category)

Emulators usually take a few years to actually be considered usable/stable. Don't expect to be running OS X in that manner on your PC any time soon.

oik

May 11 2004, 23:36

Quote - (Trek234 @ May 11 2004, 23:32)

Seems like a moot point of people are "using" pirated copys at the moment. Wow, I got to the desktop before a major crash! Whoopdeedo.

Key thing to remember about emulators: Most of the time they are for novelty more than anything else. Does a single person on this thread who has used the emu done so with intent to actually USE it for something? No, it's just fun to screw around with in your free time. "Oh look I got to the OS X desktop on my PC at 2FPS! Yay!" well back to Windows I go.

you do realize that it's a 0.01 release, right? by the time this hits 1.0 final, it should be running quite a bit faster.

Trek234

May 11 2004, 23:37

Quote - (oik @ May 11 2004, 23:36)

you do realize that it's a 0.01 release, right? by the time this hits 1.0 final, it should be running quite a bit faster.

Ok, and "by the time it hits" 1.0 final what year will it be?

I dare you to name me one emulator ever that was fully stable, fast, and feature complete in less than 5 years. Especially one that is emulating an entirely different architecture.

By the time this can emulate OS X as well as real mac you'll be able to pick up OS X for a buck and some change in the bargain bin of your local software store.

Mav Phoenix

May 11 2004, 23:40

Quote - (oik @ May 11 2004, 19:36)

you do realize that it's a 0.01 release, right? by the time this hits 1.0 final, it should be running quite a bit faster.

0.1

cooldude7273

May 11 2004, 23:41

can anyone translate that documentation into normal english for us non super-nerds?

STOP FIGHTING AND HELP ME PLEASE

nuka_t

May 11 2004, 23:42

Quote - (oik @ May 11 2004, 23:28)

since this would probably be the main thing that would stop apple from smushing this under it's legal (or technical) thumb, yes.

apple can make a great deal of money if people bought the os. but if you all just use pirated copies, then apple's not gonna give a ****. they can go the legal route or the tech route and then *poof* pearpc no longer works.

ion its current state, nobody is going to be dumb enough to go out and buy a retail 130 dollar license of OSX to test out a program that is at version .1, and apple isnt going to be dumb enough to expect them to. once hte OS becomes usable, then yes, i would expect people ot pay for it. in its current state however, its just stupid.

oik

May 11 2004, 23:47

Quote - (Mav Phoenix @ May 11 2004, 23:40)

0.1

see trek, we're already 10x closer to release then i thought we were! the apocalypse is coming!

oik

May 11 2004, 23:48

Quote - (nuka_t @ May 11 2004, 23:42)

in its current state, nobody is going to be dumb enough to go out and buy a retail 130 dollar license of OSX to test out a program that is at version .1, and apple isnt going to be dumb enough to expect them to. once hte OS becomes usable, then yes, i would expect people ot pay for it. in its current state however, its just stupid.

i don't think anything will change. the people who use pearpc today while in beta with a pirated copy of panther will be the same ones who use pearpc tomorrow while in release with a pirated copy of whatever os apple is up to tomorrow.

Trek234

May 11 2004, 23:55

Quote - (oik @ May 11 2004, 23:48)

i don't think anything will change. the people who use pearpc today while in beta with a pirated copy of panther will be the same ones who use pearpc tomorrow while in release with a pirated copy of whatever os apple is up to tomorrow.

And considering the fact this won't be able to run OS X any where near as well as a real mac until AT LEAST the year 2009-2015 (assuming it develops in the same time frame as most other emulators) apple will seriously be looking at a problem. Gee, all those $1.00 Mac OS X legacy OSs they won't be selling. It's not like anyone will be using OS XII on far more adanced hardware or anything. Everyone is going to want legacy OS X for PearPC by god. Yea, Apple is really going to be hurting.

(And I mean, it's not like the biggest numbers of piraters of OS X don't already have a mac you know... Yea, all the OS X pirates of today must be using this emulator!) Hate to tell you, but piracy will happen emulator or no emulator.

evn.

May 11 2004, 23:57

I don't think I ever said the emulator is illegal but using it to run Mac OS X is (at least in countries where EULAs have some weight). That was the point I was making.

If you wanted to learn PPC assembly this might be one way to do it, running linux or some PPC only OSs that don't have the draconian restrictions that OS X does is another (though obviously using x86 versions of linux, solaris, etc will make more sense for 99.999% of people out there).

I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple launch some sort of offensive on the people who would use this software to run it's software.

As for the "old" emulators: by the time they were running OS 8, apple had released OS 8.5 and abandoned the M68k processor that those systems were using. OS 8.6 and powerpc emulation was 'mostly' working in any form only a few months ago.

For the most part the x86 world has been years behind when it came to emulating macintosh systems: probalby because the market is somewhat limited (only a small percentage of windows users have any interest in emulating PPC systems to do anything but run OS X - which they cannot do legally, a large number of macintosh owners are interested in running Windows and other x86 operating systems which they CAN do legally).

WRT ROM images: New world machines (the ibook and pretty much everything after) pull most of their rom functions from the install media. That's an over simiplified view - but this isn't really a technical discussion. The old "copy the rom from the board" junk shouldn't be needed. The "BIOS" equivalent on a modern macintosh is openfirmware - as the name would suggest it's not as proprietary as the old mactoolbox/rom mess form 1984.

Trek234

May 11 2004, 23:59

Quote - (the evn show @ May 11 2004, 23:57)

I don't think I ever said the emulator is illegal but using it to run Mac OS X is (at least in countries where EULAs have some weight). That was the point I was making.

I apologize in that case. You are correct on this point.

You also bring up a good point about the time frame of those emulators. By the time they were able to emulate OS 8 pretty well (which was and IS still very buggy, by no means as well as a real mac) OS 8 was already outdated.

By the time this emulator runs OS X as well as a real mac it will be far outdated too.

This may also be a good thing for apple. Apple had thought about emulation before as a means to expand its market share. If PC users use this to run OS X and say "Hey! This really looks nice, but running at 10FPS and crashing every 30 seconds really upsets me. I can't believe what I was missing though, maybe I'll go out and buy a real mac to run at full speed with out the crahses!". Not many people are willing to shell out hundreds of dollars to "try out" OS X. The vast majority of stores don't even sell mac systems. The thing is a lot of people ARE willing to test it out on a buggy emulator. I wouldn't be surprised if some people liked what they saw and swtiched over.

evn.

May 12 2004, 00:11

No problem: we both had some good points - and now the thread isn't completely mindless ranting.

It will be interesting to see if Microsoft updates VirtualPC to run Longhorn (or whatever they call the next version of Windows) when it finally ships a few years from now. The emulation scense might just 'switch sides' in terms of which platform does it best by the end of the decade.

EDIT:
saw your edit after I posted.

About people switching after trying the emulated version: I would bet that it pretty much cancels out the people who would have bought a mac just to try it out. For people with full time jobs and a love of technology a new emac for $700 isn't a whole lot of money, especially if the machine can still be used as a file server running *NIX if they don't care for OS X. If they could tinker with OS X on an emulator maybe they wouldn't buy a mac at all?

Who knows.

bluetypewriter

May 12 2004, 00:25

Just curious...For those of you who have succesfully installed OSX, has anyone tried moving the HDD image file to another WinXP/Linux box with a different hardware configuration to see if it has any influence on your PearPC version of OSX?

In other words, can someone with a successfully installed image run it on a different PC?

Jackalo

May 12 2004, 00:44

I don't see why not. Just make sure that the configuration file is the same.

Atoner

May 12 2004, 00:49

Quote - (cooldude7273 @ May 11 2004, 23:41)

can anyone translate that documentation into normal english for us non super-nerds?

STOP FIGHTING AND HELP ME PLEASE

I'll help you if you have a specific question. Try going thru as much of the install as you can and if you get hung up on something post it!

-A-

Starman

May 12 2004, 01:00

Processing Base System Part 2

Writing files: 72%

Remaining time: 5h39m

Mike

Starman

May 12 2004, 01:01

Quote - (Trek234 @ May 11 2004, 19:17)

No I wasn't... If you already bought the software then why are you complaining that Microsoft doesn't include it free for you?

Where was I actually complaining about it? I was just making a point.

Are you LOOKING to start an argument? Seems like it.

Mike

cooldude7273

May 12 2004, 01:02

Quote - (Atoner @ May 11 2004, 19:49)

I'll help you if you have a specific question. Try going thru as much of the install as you can and if you get hung up on something post it!

-A-

thanks

i'm stuck at the first stop with gcc with or whatever

nuka_t

May 12 2004, 01:03

Quote - (the evn show @ May 12 2004, 00:11)

No problem: we both had some good points - and now the thread isn't completely mindless ranting.

It will be interesting to see if Microsoft updates VirtualPC to run Longhorn (or whatever they call the next version of Windows) when it finally ships a few years from now. The emulation scense might just 'switch sides' in terms of which platform does it best by the end of the decade.

EDIT:
saw your edit after I posted.

About people switching after trying the emulated version: I would bet that it pretty much cancels out the people who would have bought a mac just to try it out. For people with full time jobs and a love of technology a new emac for $700 isn't a whole lot of money, especially if the machine can still be used as a file server running *NIX if they don't care for OS X. If they could tinker with OS X on an emulator maybe they wouldn't buy a mac at all?

Who knows.

VPC already is caqpable of running LH(windows version anyway) but if it can run xp, it can run lh.

i htink that a big pull factor of the mac is the newness and goodlooks but im sure taht once people get tired of it, they would just go back to a pc. though there will be people that like it and buy a real mac. however, in its current form, it will not change apples marketshare in any way.

Trek234

May 12 2004, 01:18

Quote - (Starman @ May 12 2004, 01:01)

Where was I actually complaining about it? I was just making a point.

Are you LOOKING to start an argument? Seems like it.

Mike

Not trying to cause an argument. I am not the one that started criticizing Windows. (or shall I saying making "points")

Considering the fact you contradicted your self by 1. Making a "point" about windows not having a strong software bundle and then earlier 2. Making a "point" about windows integration = bad. It seems like you had motives your self or faulty logic.

Of course complaints by people regarding point 2 caused point 1 to be true. You can't make both "points" except by relying on faulty logic.

If you didn't want someone to call you on this, why did you make these "points"? Don't try to pin it on me. There is enough anti-mac and anti-windows sentiment on this thread already. It would be like me making a thread titled "AMD OWNZ INTEL" and then accusing others of looking to start an argument.

Starman

May 12 2004, 01:31

WHAT are you talking about?????

People have already called you on your attitude.

Mike

Starman

May 12 2004, 01:35

Quote - (cooldude7273 @ May 11 2004, 21:02)

thanks

i'm stuck at the first stop with gcc with or whatever

From your sig it seems like you run Windows. You don't need to build this with gcc.

All you have to do is download the jitc zip file, download and unzip the 3 GB hard drive image, and you're ready to start.

The only thing you have to do is modify the config file based on your Panther disk images.

Mike

Trek234

May 12 2004, 01:40

"WHAT are you talking about?????"

Not even worth it.

"People have already called you on your attitude."

Please provide me an example.

I am the one supportive of this emu, you are the one running around posting all the doom and gloom apple needs to take this emu out posts. But I guess I am the one with the negative attitude on the thread.

Starman

May 12 2004, 01:45

All I did was quote the EULA and give people a heads up that Apple has the right to drop-kick this from the internet. Same thing with that tool that rips the DRM from iTunes music. If they find ANY way to do it, they will. I'm just giving everyone a heads up because it WILL happen. Most of Apple's revenue comes from their hardware sales. Anything that damages that WILL be taken away.

And you seem to ignore the fact that I'm running this. It's a cool idea. The problem is that it's a pipe dream.

Oh, and...

Quote -

apple will go on this one because it runs osx. notice how all the others run everything BUT osx? this is their flagship os. you do not know as much as you would like us to think you do, run along now.

Mike

Atoner

May 12 2004, 01:50

Quote - (cooldude7273 @ May 12 2004, 01:02)

thanks

i'm stuck at the first stop with gcc with or whatever

Are you running Windows or Linux?

If you're on Windows, it should be easier to just download the JITC (fast) version instead of using gcc and compiling from scratch.

First, follow this link to get the Win32 JITC version
http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/pearpc/...-win32-jitc.zip

Then, unzip it to a directory on your local hard disk -- I used "C:\PearPC\".

To configure it, edit the file "ppccfg.example".

To run it, open a command line ( Start->Run->cmd, then hit OK ) and type in "C:\PearPC\ppc ppccfg.example"

-A-

cooldude7273

May 12 2004, 01:53

Quote - (Starman @ May 11 2004, 20:35)

From your sig it seems like you run Windows. You don't need to build this with gcc.

All you have to do is download the jitc zip file, download and unzip the 3 GB hard drive image, and you're ready to start.

The only thing you have to do is modify the config file based on your Panther disk images.

Mike

okay, i have everything downloaded and extracted, and now i'm lost again

Trek234

May 12 2004, 01:53

Quote - (Starman @ May 12 2004, 01:45)

All I did was quote the EULA and give people a heads up that Apple has the right to drop-kick this from the internet. Same thing with that tool that rips the DRM from iTunes music. If they find ANY way to do it, they will. I'm just giving everyone a heads up because it WILL happen. Most of Apple's revenue comes from their hardware sales. Anything that damages that WILL be taken away.

And you seem to ignore the fact that I'm running this. It's a cool idea. The problem is that it's a pipe dream.

Oh, and...

Mike

Oh ok I see. So basically your point was that apple is above the law and they "WILL" accomplish this even though sony and nintendo failed in the courts. okie dokie whatever you say.