←back to thread

I bought a Mac

(loganius.org)
237 points todsacerdoti | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.618s | source
Show context
SpecialistK ◴[] No.43677433[source]
The late PowerPC-era Macs are really fun to play with, because they're an interesting blend of modern niceties like USB and Ethernet but are limited with how old most software is. There's still a scene of people working on bringing newer versions of GCC and other *nix utilities to Tiger or Leopard, working with the pre-release PPC betas of Snow Leopard, and trying to keep online services working despite aging TLS versions and retired APIs. Compiling takes forever until it fails with an obscure C11 error or missing C library features. And that makes for a fun, if often frustrating, challenge.

But PPC32 Linux support is quickly falling off. Gentoo isn't just used because it's fun to leave your lampshade iMac G4 compiling a kernel for days, but because it's one of the few distros still supporting the platform. There's unsupported testing repos for Debian (and maybe Ubuntu?) plus the up-and-coming Adelie. Otherwise your best bet is OpenBSD - FreeBSD and NetBSD usually lack precompiled ports, and FreeBSD has announced the next major release will almost definitely drop 32 bit PPC.

The 64 bit G5 systems are much better supporte. I'm pretty sure they can boot ppc64le that many distros target. They're also even more modern - the final models had PCIe, SATA, and up to 16GB of DDR2 RAM. Sadly there's nothing modern about the power efficiency, nor the self-destructing water cooling system.

replies(11): >>43677491 #>>43677500 #>>43677524 #>>43677545 #>>43677606 #>>43677681 #>>43678193 #>>43678321 #>>43679399 #>>43688319 #>>43709006 #
genevra ◴[] No.43677500[source]
It's always bothered me that Apple has so little backwards compatibility. I suppose that's why Windows is used by most of the corporate world for "reliability" (more reliable than Apple), and "ease of use" (people don't want to learn command line for Linux). It's just the mid option
replies(9): >>43677544 #>>43677566 #>>43677619 #>>43679159 #>>43679908 #>>43680012 #>>43680137 #>>43682223 #>>43686116 #
opan ◴[] No.43677544[source]
Doesn't this mainly come down to Macs using weirder architectures while Windows largely stuck to the IBM PC and its clones/descendants?

I'm also seeing more software lately talking about dropping support for Windows 7 or 8 after a certain release.

replies(1): >>43677641 #
p_ing ◴[] No.43677641[source]
There's no reason today's macOS couldn't support a Classic environment, like the early releases of OS X. There are a lot of support costs surrounding such an environment, so I don't blame Apple for dropping it.

It supports x86 emulation, for now.

I believe Windows has seen more architectures than Mac OS Classic and OS X combined.

Windows 3rd party software often drops support because Microsoft doesn't support the OS. It could be the desire to use new APIs that aren't included in 7/8 (or soon to be 10), but it's hard to support an operating system as an app vendor that the OS vendor doesn't support.

I always liked VMware's statement that they would support NT4 and above -- like, no you can't.

replies(2): >>43677954 #>>43678506 #
1. danieldk ◴[] No.43678506[source]
* I believe Windows has seen more architectures than Mac OS Classic and OS X combined.*

I have never been a Windows user, but I used to keep an eye on it when NT was still the separate business version (pre-Vista) and my NT 4.0 (or was it 3.51?) CD-ROM had x86, MIPS, Alpha and maybe PowerPC support. When things weren’t as clear platform-wise, NT was really a multi-platform system. Since then also x86_64, IA64, ARM64.

replies(1): >>43680243 #
2. p_ing ◴[] No.43680243[source]
CE adds SH3 to the processor list.
replies(1): >>43681581 #
3. rjsw ◴[] No.43681581[source]
And ARM32.