SheepShaver: macOS run-time environment for BeOS and Linux
sheepshaver.cebix.net
sheepshaver.cebix.net
No space.
MacOS == System 1 to MacOS 9.
Mac OS == OS X == 10.0 to 10.12.
macOS == 10.13 to 13.
I can't speak to previous releases, but Mac OS 9 definitely used a space. (Before looking it up I would've bet on "no space" too, BTW.)
[1] https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/12/69888558_ee83d000f9.jpg
[2] https://o.aolcdn.com/images/dims?image_uri=https:%2F%2Fs3.am...
I do miss System 7.
It's a hard habit to drop.
[0]: https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/2549/whats-the-pro...
[[Citation needed]]]
> Before it was called Mac OS, it was called the System Software.
Yes, true.
I seem to recall that versions prior to 7.5 were "Macintosh System Software".
As of 2020, graphical app support appeared to be basic but somewhat functional: https://github.com/darlinghq/darling/issues/657
I agree that GUI apps are the real use case here. Honestly, reversing and recreating the MacOS APIs is such a mammoth effort though, I can understand why progress would be slow. Wine faced a similar struggle, but also had an urgent need driving it: we needed Win apps to work to make Linux viable for most people. That’s less the case for Mac apps, so Darling is by necessity more of a passion project.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS-9#Name_conflicts_and_court_...>
-mac os 9
"run classic PowerPC Mac OS applications"
"Runs MacOS 7.5.2 thru 9.0.4. MacOS X as a guest is not supported."
BeOS, Syllable, SkyOS, Atheos, ReactOS, QNX etc.
At its time I liked BeOS phylosophy more than that of Linux and Windows, it's a shame it didn't take off.
It ran like a dream, except for kernel panicking every 5 minutes.
Did you report any of these panics?
The Amiga "Tabor" or "A1222" is a very, very silly machine. Because they insist on PowerPC even though that's basically a long dead architecture, the best available CPU for it was the QorIQ P1022 a SOC designed to be inside say a mid-range Ethernet switch a decade ago.
In the event they actually ship a product in some sort of volume (say, dozens) before NXP discontinue the processors altogether this would be far worse than a PC or Mac you could have bought in 2015 when it was conceived, and yet also far more expensive, very silly.
I was referring too the X5000 which is PowerISA architecture. A1222 is planned to be around $500 which is not all that expensive, X5000 is on the expensive side. Considering my use of such a computer would be to run various audio software that was designed for much slower single core machines I suspect a dual 2ghz processor with XMOS coprocessor would be quite satisfactory. It would allow me to use some software which does not play well with emulators and would probably be just about ideal for my needs when it comes to a studio computer.
I suspect the A1222 project was scrapped due to shutdown fallout, chip shortages, etc but who knows, it may still happen.
Nothing is going to "fill that niche" because it's not actually a niche, just your brain playing tricks on you.
And the X5000 isn't "in production" in any meaningful sense. Somewhere there may be some boards on a shelf that are technically "new in box", but this is fairly old hardware from an even older design. That P5020 CPU is thirteen years old and whilst its industrial customers presumably used the second core, Amiga software does not.
Amiga "developers" periodically claim that they're working very hard on that, all the way back to 2013 you can find very earnest sounding men explaining that they've mostly got it working but it is being tested by a select group under NDA. They're bullshitting, telling Amigans you just need a few more weeks a bit more money means you don't have to admit that you spent every penny and there's nothing to show for it. Maybe a miracle will happen.
I never said the x5000 was in production, I actually said it wasn't.
The closest thing to "Amiga Developers" would be Hyperion who took over the OS and has made licensing deals with 5 or 6 different hardware producers, they make no hardware themselves. Over the past decade or so at least a dozen different Amiga systems and motherboards have gone into production and sold well for what it is. Most of the hardware is sold through various online stores with a couple of those producing hardware also selling online, Hyperion only sells software; so who exactly are these evil "Amiga developers" you talk about? Or is it a conspiracy and they are all involved?
If you are going to make accusations you should identify the culprit, would you blame Microsoft and everyone who makes or sells computers which run Windows because HP ripped you off?
It's much worse than that. Only the first core is even "running". The Amiga OS isn't intended to handle true concurrency, which is why the 68k era operating system provides Forbid/Permit and Disable/Enable, which respectively forbid the OS from task switching and disable all interrupts. This made writing a 1980s home video game for the Amiga hardware much easier, but most application software took advantage of this too.
The PowerPC port of the system from the turn of the century actually doubles down on this nonsense, presumably because it made it easier to implement. As a result even "new" Amiga software, such as it is, still relies on these Forbid/Permit and Disable/Enable semantics, ensuring it can't be made to run efficiently on multi-core hardware. If there was widespread new application development you could imagine first shipping new SDKs which avoid these semantics, and latterly getting rid of the programs which use them but obviously for Amiga that's not practical at all and probably hasn't been for many years.
Over the 20+ years since I'm afraid things got a lot more complicated than "Hyperion took over the OS" although since Hyperion are one of several entities engaged in pointless legal wrangling about this topic perhaps if you believe their version of events that's what you'd get out of it. Trevor Dickinson ends up funding a lot of the remaining software development. sometimes via the A-EON Technology Ltd vehicle, other times personally.
There are a long parade of "culprits" if you want to use that term, whether Amiga Inc, Hyperion Entertainment, Eyetech Ltd, or specific individuals like the Friedens, Bill McEwen, Steven Solie, Ben Hermans, Alan Redhouse, Trevor, there are always people who'd like to exchange your money for their promises. Do they know the promises are bogus? I don't care, and if you ensure you don't give them money then nor should you.
It really was an impressive and innovative way to get people to try a new OS, keeping in mind that most people couldn't (and still can't, to be fair) set up a more normal dual boot setup. I think they were just too close to shutting down by that point, so nothing ever really came of it.
In all honesty BeOS had no leverage because they were so committed to build the successor of MacOS that they had no alternative plan
But that was not the only thing.
Be had no particularly special story about dev tools; NeXT had the world's best, plus a charismatic, visionary CEO.
Be should have gone and done a deal with Acorn, who could have done them a silent-running, passively-cooled SMP multi-ARM workstation in 1998 for less than the cost of a mid-range Mac.
Acorn had cheap SMP hardware ready to go. Be had the state-of-the-art SMP workstation OS before Linux 2.2 made it able to scale usefully.
Late 90s I was running OS X Server, Be, and NeXT. NeXT was better than OS X Server, and Be was far behind. Looked pretty, but that was about it. Funny thing is I live in a browser and text editor now, and the Be install I ran in 99 would just about do it!
Well, quite, yes.
> Late 90s I was running OS X Server, Be, and NeXT.
Early adopter, huh? OSXS only appeared in 1999.
> NeXT was better than OS X Server
How so? UI?
I'm just curious.
> Be was far behind. Looked pretty, but that was about it.
I reviewed it then:
https://archive.org/details/PersonalComputerWorldMagazine/PC...
I think it was more than just a pretty face. It was a demo of how computing should be, and showed that everything else is a bloated mess.
It's much worse now, of course.
> Funny thing is I live in a browser and text editor now, and the Be install I ran in 99 would just about do it!
Which was largely my own thought about Haiku b4. It's very close to doing everything I need.
Agree on Be, and I've tried Hauki off and on. It really seems, as I default to using my phone for nearly everything anyway, that a system like that really is ideal at this point. Like a lot of people my day is spent a jump server away, so I haven't cared what I'm using 99 percent of the time.
I mean, yes, NeXTstep was much more mature. No argument. But OS X Server was aimed at a different job, and a different job to classic MacOS as well.
People did use NeXTstep as a server -- the first ever web server, notably -- but it wasn't a great one and wasn't its intended role.
Classic MacOS was usable as a server too. It seems to be largely forgotten now but the US Army officially moved all its web servers to classic MacOS at one point, because not having any form of shell at all made it largely unhackable. You can't get shell access when there is no shell to get to, and no clever x86 code exploit will help you when none of the servers have an x86 chip in them.
It wasn't a very good server, though, and quietly I think they changed to something else a bit more conventional not long afterwards.
Compared to Classic, I bet OS X Server was a great server OS. ;-)
I think the real purpose of OSXS was to answer the question:
"OK, we've done a ton of work porting NeXTstep to PowerMac and grafting a kinda sorta MacOS-like desktop on the thing, and it's cost us a sh1t-tonne of money and person-hours of work with not much to show for it so far. Is there any way we can start to make some money off this thing before it's ready to ship as a desktop OS?"
ps I just started trying out Risc OS after reading a couple of your articles on it (modernizing (or not) and the gem of an os (or not)).
I've got it on my pi 400, and use it for writing without distraction (no wifi!), and there is no latency while typing. The ADJUST button thing is also pretty neat.
Yeah, you're right, it's just an idle daydream fantasy of mine.
RISC OS was and is pretty small and simple. I reckon doing to it what Apple did with Classic -- a version running in a native VM -- was doable.
(I say this as someone who grew up with first and Electron then an A3000.)
I reckon Acorn had 2 possible escape routes, but they didn't seem to notice either.
[1] Make the thinnest lightest longest-battery-life laptops around, able to do all the stuff the DOS/Win9x phat boyz did but with no fan, no extra cooling, and do it for a day at a time.
RISC OS would have been fine for that... but it was just a different dead end road.
[2] The Phoebe (RISC PC 2) was SMP-capable, had richer media support and PCI and so on, but RISC OS wasn't SMP ready and wasn't going to be.
SMP was already manifestly The Future. So, commit to it. Current SOTA OSes in ~1998 that could do SMP were either:
• Expensive proprietary UNIX workstations -- so undercut them
• Windows NT 4 -- not really finished yet, serious weaknesses (e.g. no USB), even if it was the first version with a credible UI.
• Linux was not there yet.
There was an opening, but the plan to build their own OS -- again -- was insane. They didn't know it but they needed a partner with a lightweight SMP media OS. Be had a lightweight SMP media OS but needed more competitive hardware.
But these are just daydreams.
If the bottom line is just maximising revenue -- to hell with changing the world, just sell more sugar water (to paraphrase Jobs to Sculley) -- then they did the right thing. Sell lotsa chips, dump the workstations and the OS.
You could buy a Ferrari or a Ford, but an M1 Tank that ran for 1000 miles on a cup of fuel was for free. Keys in, sitting there. Get in, drive off.
I merely quoted -- or at least paraphrased -- the original essay itself:
« They've been modified in such a way that they never, ever break down, are light and maneuverable enough to use on ordinary streets, and use no more fuel than a subcompact car. These tanks are being cranked out, on the spot, at a terrific pace, and a vast number of them are lined up along the edge of the road with keys in the ignition. Anyone who wants can simply climb into one and drive it away for free. »
https://web.stanford.edu/class/cs81n/command.txt
This essay is so important, so valuable, and so blasted insightful, that even though I read it more than 20 years ago, I can still remember key phrases, and search for it, find it, and quote from it in seconds.
It should be one of the seminal texts of the FOSS movement. And yet most people don't know it, or if they do, they don't get it and misquote it or misinterpret important points... such as here, claiming that people were trying to sell Linux up against BeOS and MacOS and Windows, when the real point was that although it was better than all the commercial competition in important ways, it was FREE and yet the people that developed it literally could not GIVE IT AWAY for nothing, up against inferior commercial OSes.
And they still can't.
Everyone has probably also forgotten by now that Sun bought StarOffice and tried to give it away, and nobody cared. So some forgotten Sun exec, who actually understood how businesspeople's minds work, made a discount version. It was $89.95 or something, alongside and as well as the free version.
The result was a modest explosion in business uptake.
A free office suite? Must be junk. But a bargain basement full-function office suite, for eighty bucks when MS Office costs a few hundreds? That's a steal! Great -- I will have that and push it out across my business!
It worked.
And now, Linux is on the desktop and it's a roaring success, selling hundreds of millions of units, and outselling Macs.
It's called ChromeOS, and when I point this out, the geeks of HN get very angry at me, and complain, and say that I'm moving the goalposts, that ChromeOS doesn't count, that it's not really Linux.
They accuse me of "bad faith": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34925697
They call my argument "BS": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34928295
Even one specific commenter I really respect and whose posts I find richly informative and learn from, flat out deny that it is Linux: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34971384
Ah well.
We all know Linux runs servers, routers, and most smartphones, but if it's on the desktop, and it costs money, then it's obviously not Linux. If it's a successful desktop that people like, it clearly can't really be Linux, right?
Shakes head, walks away.
Anyway, for better context, here's the whole passage from ITBWTCL:
« With one exception, that is: Linux, which is right next door, and which is not a business at all. It's a bunch of RVs, yurts, tepees, and geodesic domes set up in a field and organized by consensus. The people who live there are making tanks. These are not old-fashioned, cast-iron Soviet tanks; these are more like the M1 tanks of the U.S. Army, made of space-age materials and jammed with sophisticated technology from one end to the other. But they are better than Army tanks. They've been modified in such a way that they never, ever break down, are light and maneuverable enough to use on ordinary streets, and use no more fuel than a subcompact car. These tanks are being cranked out, on the spot, at a terrific pace, and a vast number of them are lined up along the edge of the road with keys in the ignition. Anyone who wants can simply climb into one and drive it away for free.
Customers come to this crossroads in throngs, day and night. Ninety percent of them go straight to the biggest dealership and buy station wagons or off-road vehicles. They do not even look at the other dealerships.
Of the remaining ten percent, most go and buy a sleek Euro-sedan, pausing only to turn up their noses at the philistines going to buy the station wagons and ORVs. If they even notice the people on the opposite side of the road, selling the cheaper, technically superior vehicles, these customers deride them cranks and half-wits.
The Batmobile outlet sells a few vehicles to the occasional car nut who wants a second vehicle to go with his station wagon, but seems to accept, at least for now, that it's a fringe player.
The group giving away the free tanks only stays alive because it is staffed by volunteers, who are lined up at the edge of the street with bullhorns, trying to draw customers' attention to this incredible situation. A typical conversation goes something like this:
Hacker with bullhorn: "Save your money! Accept one of our free tanks! It is invulnerable, and can drive across rocks and swamps at ninety miles an hour while getting a hundred miles to the gallon!"
Prospective station wagon buyer: "I know what you say is true...but...er...I don't know how to maintain a tank!"
Bullhorn: "You don't know how to maintain a station wagon either!"
Buyer: "But this dealership has mechanics on staff. If something goes wrong with my station wagon, I can take a day off work, bring it here, and pay them to work on it while I sit in the waiting room for hours, listening to elevator music."
Bullhorn: "But if you accept one of our free tanks we will send volunteers to your house to fix it for free while you sleep!"
Buyer: "Stay away from my house, you freak!"
Bullhorn: "But..."
Buyer: "Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?" »
But you have your M1, you can not buy ammunition for its guns or drive it on any roads because the tracks will eat up the pavement but it is your M1.
Not trying to be nasty but I mean, come on, it was THE key point of the essay.
Stephenson did compare Linux to a tank, but he also compared it to the Milwaukee Hole Hawg drill, and that analogy (rather than the tank, which I'd forgotten about entirely) was more memorable for me personally.
His argument was that Linux was a very powerful tool for people who know what they're doing. The Hole Hawg has a motor that's so powerful, if the bit gets stuck, the body of the drill will spin in the other direction with enough force to spin the operator around (if they manage to hold on) or break their arm(s) if they lose their grip. People doing certain kinds of serious work want that level of power, but everyone else would most likely be happier with a regular power drill. Not only are they safer, they're a lot smaller and weigh a lot less.
Similarly, getting a tank with great gas mileage for free sounds pretty neat at first glance. On the other hand, if someone used to driving a sedan tries to use a tank as a drop-in replacement, the regrets are going to pile up pretty quickly. They might collapse some structures designed for regular vehicles just by driving over them, because tanks weigh so much more. They'll most likely tear up dirt and gravel driveways. They probably won't be able to park it in the places they'd park their car, because the tank is so much bigger. Getting in and out of the vehicle is more of an adventure.
There are definitely folks who would love their own tank - I know in Australia there are people that converted surplus WWII tanks into farming equipment - but most non-specialists would be unhappy with one, just like they'd have been unhappy trying to use Linux as a desktop OS in the era when In the Beginning was the Command Line was written, regardless of the price.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhDQicLvHNQ
I'm not sure if MOL will work on the newer kernel used by Wii U linux though.
Speculation: Running on native hardware probably give you better performance, and probably meant that you didn't have to provide a ROM file because it could just read the chip that's actually installed in the machine.
I remember I was also very pleased to get copy-paste working between the systems, but I may have had to install something for this.
I had a a project for #marchintosh of making myself a nice powerPC emulation stack to recompile and open source quite a few free/shareware I did back then, but I more or less gave up as I couldn't find something 'comfortable' to work in. I guess I'll have to find, dust up and try to hook that old G4 Mac Mini that I'm sure is in a drawer, somewhere :-)
With some hacking you can run all MacOS/MacOS X versions on x86, x64 and PPC from 8.6 to 13 if you have a x64 machine. If you have an Apple Silicon one it gets too slow to simulate around 10.10 (on x64 you can use hvf virtualization). It might be a bit less nice than tailored emulators like SheepShaver but having the same UI for all these OSes (plus other OSes) beats everything in my opinion.
Unfortunately Apple Silicon machines cannot be simulated without some hidden knowledge only some secretive companies have. Hopefully the knowledge will become public some years from now.
https://github.com/ctm/executor
and didn't stick around until Rosetta and so forth went away and it became potentially more useful.
qemu-system-ppc (2019) can run Mac OS X 10.5 PowerPC https://wiki.qemu.org/Documentation/Platforms/PowerPC
pearpc (2015) can run Mac OS X 10.3 PowerPC with caveats https://pearpc.sourceforge.net/
SheepShaver can run Mac OS 9.0.4 PowerPC
Basilisk II can run Mac OS 8.1 68k
I wonder where that went
I should see how it runs all these years later on a Linux box.
Bold of you to assume a forum full of tech enthusiasts don't have PPC machines sitting around.
It's just my path never crossed PowerPC's, so I don't have the nostalgia for them that I do for classic x86 hardware. Regardless I'm sure they are an important piece of computing history.
I have 2 BeOS PowerPC boxes, so yep - know all the hassles first hand.
If you do too - awesome, you should come find me on Haiku forums and we can contribute to the BeOS PowerPC preservation effort I started last year.
In writing apps with other desktop UI frameworks, it's become evident just how much AppKit does well that many frameworks barely do or don't offer at all. Sometimes it's even really basic things, like how WinUI somehow has no first-party tableview despite that being one of the most fundamental desktop widgets.
Cross-platform AppKit would be a dream setup.
Not that I dislike the NeXT visuals - I’d totally have a NeXT as my daily driver (with X, of course), but it became dated the moment Windows 95 copied it.
In any case, anything that can be documented can be implemented in a clean room.
And also for OS X, Windows, and BSD.
But for some reason, using the same repository for 3 independent projects horrifies me.
The commits are unavoidably going to be all over the place, and tracking one project's changes hard.
Still, I see more cons than pros in macemu's case.