Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 25th May 2014 16:04 UTC
Mac OS X

Like most of you, I've always wanted want to code and compile 68k Mac OS applications in OS X that work on System 1.1. This question kept me up night after night, but thanks to Steven Troughton-Smith, we now know that it is, indeed, possible. It started with a 68k application on System 6. Not long after, he managed to compile a simple application that worked on System 1.1. This test application's code is available on github.

This is possible using ksherlock's MPW Emulator, which, as the name implies, is an emulator that allows you to run the Macintosh Programmer's Workshop on any OS X 10.9 system (a case-insensitive HFS+ volume is required).

I'm glad this matter has been settled. In all seriousness, while the number of useful applications for this is probably limited, it's still very cool.

Order by: Score:
Comment by jockm
by jockm on Sun 25th May 2014 18:38 UTC
Member since:

I never wrote anything for 1.1, but I did write some code for System 3 and had no real desire to look back ;)

Reply Score: 3

I did a great deal of coding in MPW
by TM99 on Mon 26th May 2014 11:16 UTC
Member since:

and the classic Mac OS. This is very interesting to me and I know for a select group of others, because it might allow for maintenance and/or creation of old OS 9 software that is still used in pro audio for example.

I wish this would work with XCode 4.x on Snow Leopard, as that's the version of OS X that is the sweet spot for me right now. I can still use PPC apps. I have a lot of pro audio software investments tied to Snow Leopard including older hardware without newer drivers. And bluntly I just don't like the newer integrative iOS/OSX model being pushed on developers.

Reply Score: 2

leech Member since:

I hadn't ever used OS X besides setting up a wifi for a friend, until about a month ago when my new job gave me a Macbook Pro.

While I'm still getting used to it, I have to say there are some cool features, but kind of wish they'd just copy gnome-shell already. I know this is going to start some flame wars HA!.

But I agree, to me the PPC is just awesome, and I have always wanted one. I considered putting one in my Amiga, and running OS4. But there really isn't much in the way of native applications that are solely for the Amiga. Sure people are porting Open(libre)Office and Firefox.. but I can run those on any Linux/Windows/Mac I want. Guess it's the chicken/egg thing. You need Apps for people to use the OS, but no one wants to write for the OS if there are no users.

I do find it sad that everything has converged on x86, and long for the days when there were competition. Even sadder is that it was nice for a while in the Mobile market, but it's once again pretty much Arm with two giants, and a bunch of little guys.

If IBM would take their Power chips and sell them in desktop systems, then get a killer OS for it, I'd buy one. Only other choice is buy an Old Mac, that's no longer supported, unless you want to install MorphOS or AROS on it, or try to find a PPC accelerator for the Amiga, and pay a small fortune for it....

Reply Score: 0

jockm Member since:

Well IBM has no interest in the desktop market, but exactly nothing stops people from buying IBM PPC chips and making Desktop class machines. Perhaps not all versions of the PPC chips they make, but a number.

And at least for a bit more you can get PPC chips from PA Semi, Freescale still manufactures them, and they are available as part of some of FPGAs. So nothing is stopping any motivated person from making PPC motherboards... except that there isn't enough demand.

The simple fact is that most people rightly do not care about CPU architecture, they just want to buy commodity hardware and run the apps they need to run.

Today there is a big difference between CPU architecture and the Instruction set. Every major x86 and x64 architecture is translating instructions or groups of instructions to more efficient micro instructions.

ARM is similar, it is a family of instruction sets and cores that manufacturers are free to modify, improve, or specialize as they see fit. However because the ISA remains the same in each family you have greater compatibility.

But what is the alternative to ARM? There is MIPS, but buy and large they gave up the middle ground. They have a foothold in routers, and are still popular in the lower end of embedded. The only MIPS line that really shines is the Longsoon derivatives used in Chinese mainframes and supercomputers.

Reply Score: 5

zima Member since:

I do find it sad that everything has converged on x86, and long for the days when there were competition.

There is competition - ARM (also in some laptops, for example: )

Reply Score: 2

Simple apps are still simple
by Adurbe on Tue 27th May 2014 08:31 UTC
Member since:

Ok, it might not be bringing any 'killer apps' our way. But if you think back, may apps are actually very similar in functionality then and now. Simple example is the Calc app from the original Mac to what its like now.

I wonder what amount of bloat has been introduced in the coding between the two?

Reply Score: 2