“Our main goal is to complete the Rhapsody OS and make it an OS that people would like to use. We aim for end users and hope to bring them what Apple has brought their customers for the past 20 years – the simplicity and style which Mac OS has.” Check out the project here.
Introducing the Rhapsody Project
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Wasn’t that name already taken by apple when they were doing their hybrid MacOS/OpenStep development?
Dang! I can’t get there from work (stupid firewall. I wonder why its being blocked). Is this legit? Is it sanctioned by Apple? Are they writing a new OS from the ground up? Or are they just copying OSX?
What the hell does this mean?
“The following links download Bit Torrent links that will allow you to download the Rhapsody OS; remember that software piracy is illegal and can be punished with jail time and/or fines. Again, we would like to state that we take no responsibility for the files accessed using our Bit Torrent links.”
I find that mildly disturbing, given that their operating system is only availabhe through these links… I can only assume from this that:
*they have a serious misunderstanding of the legality of distributing files over Bit Torrent, or
*they’re basing their work off of Apple’s prior (source) code, which means its, ah, illegal.
They provide a link to a Bittorrent for Rhapsody DR2 which afaik was Apple’s; they even put up a disclaimer right above it saying that software piracy is illegal.
I’m not au pair with the license agreement under which Apple distributed Rhapsody DR2 and though I applaud their enthusiasm and ambition, they might find themself in the position of a fly trying to kiss Apple’s legal train at full speed.
I got to the site. Acording to the site it looks as if they intend to “finish” Rhapsody. I am not sure how unless they have the source to it, or it was released as Open Source. They are not clear on this. I tried to register for the Forum but have never gotten the password to log in, yes I checked the email address is correct. So, looks interesting. Curious to see if they have source code for it or not. They do not mention building from the ground up, just “finishing.” There doesn’t appear to be a FAQ either. Hope they can give some answers though.
OK I took a look at their site, It seems that the site is a walking lawsuit waiting to happen. So far is nothing more than a torrent repository for the yellow and bluebox images.
I guess the developers have not payed attentio since they are wonder why rhapsody was not developed further: hint it is called OS X now.
Kinda a cool idea (creating an OSS Mac OS). I don’t know. It might take off. I think that it would be easier to fix the problems in GNU/Linux than to start from scratch.
Realistically, I just want an installer for GNU/Linux rather than the package management stuff that makes me want to gag.
Realistically, I just want an installer for GNU/Linux rather than the package management stuff that makes me want to gag.
How about just using AppDirs, instead? I’d really hate to see some stupid Next->Next->Next installer become standard on Linux. There is a better way.
is this the continuation of OS9?
Rhapsody did not cease development, it evolved into OS X, that is why in developer previews of OS X you could still use the platinum theme.
I do not get what this project wants to do
Did they mention X86? Soo…. Oh dear. How cool can THAT be?
Okay guys, here’s the short and sweet of it. The idea behind the Rhapsody Project is to pick up where Apple left off on Rhapsody DR2 (Developer Release 2). This means updating it all. Which is why there is such a need for newer drivers. The main focus is on x86, seeing as there’s not much need in the PPC area. There is NO redistribution of Rhapsody, only (very helpful) links and tips on how to get ahold of it. The beauty of NeXT/Rhap was that everything was portable. Write an app in one place and it works in another (across achitectures). The eventual goal (a long was off) is to have compatibility with OS X.
Now I’ll state the two most important facts one more time…
1) There is NO redistribution of Rhapsody itself, only links and tips on how to get ahold of it.
2) Yes, the main focus is on x86.
I will however like to hear if there’s anybody here who knows more about the law than we might do – we knew we couldn’t distribute it, and we didn’t think we did when we used a bittorrent – otherway we’ll just have to remove those links – ppl will find the OS anyway.
-Daxziz
Sounds great, but do you(or those in this project) have the source code to rhapsody? If not nothing will become of this project-which saddens me, I was so excited when word broke of the Rhapsody OS(1997?) and I was so disappointed when Apple killed the project-MacOSX doesn’t really count-the idea was an operating system which ran on all hardware(blue box?) and supported all software(white box?)-it was the ultimate promise of middleware……
Now before you you say that we NEED the source please listen to this. The “low system” is the MACH kernel and on top or thereby if you would rather say that – it SEEMS to be an early version of Darwin – now is Darwin opensource – ahhhh YES – can be add new device drivers to it without the sourcecode – ahhh YES – can we then produce a more up-to-date OS – In our opinions yes we can.
-Daxziz
Since we have no wish about breaking the law or hurt anyone or anybody have we started a small investigation about what we can put up for dl and now – therefore have we atleast temporary removed teh bittorrent files and floppy images until we are more certain.
-Daxziz
1) Darwin is open source.
2) Darwin has limited x86 support.
3) GNUStep is open source.
4) OS X uses the standard GNU command line tools (open source).
All you would basically need to be done is:
1) Add the missing device drivers to the current version of Darwin.
2) Create a windowing system (could use xFree86, but network transpacy isn’t needed).
3) Port GNUStep to work with above windowing system.
4) Make GNUStep a little more compatable with Cocca.
If everything is done correctly, then you sould be able to take any Mac program and just recompile it to work on the new x86 OS.
Please remember that the only thing that’s closed source on Apple is the Cocca source (GNU Step is mostly compatable), the windowing system, iLife applications, and a few configuration tools.
Is the Rhapsody Install cd bootable, or is it nessesary to download the install disks also? Also, will this run in MS VPC 2004?
Rhapsody already has a windowing system, it’s just a bit dated, but it works for now.
Cocoa itself (the Apple version) is proprietary, yes, but everything developed up until then is open, ie- all the NeXT and OpenStep stuff. Cocoa has been carefully developed to be extremely backwards compatible. The incompatibilities arise when newer technologies are introduces, like Quartz Extreme (NeXT has a postscript display, Classic MacOS used QuickDraw).
As for cross compiling, it is very possible to write and compile in NeXT on one platform and run on another without a recompile. It’s all software based, very, very portable.
“Is the Rhapsody Install cd bootable, or is it nessesary to download the install disks also? Also, will this run in MS VPC 2004?”
The boot disks are needed for now. I haven’t tried it on the new VPC, but it works on older versions.
VPC 4.1 is the max supported – the other versions are broken for some odd reason. And yes the floppies are indeed needed.
BTW I *THINK* It’s VPC 4.1.2 to be 100% correct.
-Daxziz
Firefox on my Linux box seems to draw the webpage badly; all the informational text is collected in a frame that spans maybe 25% vertical of the frame in which it’s embedded.
Also, there don’t seem to be any screenshots.
Hmm I’m sorry you guys have probs with the site. We’ll dig into it – however there IS a few screenshots.
-Daxziz
This is illegal… Rhapsody was not opensource, nor was it ever supposed to be availible to the public, it was a developers only release and required a NDA. Using Rhapsody DR2 as a starting point is clearly illegal.
You could make a clean-room version by using Darwin and GNUStep, but then its not really Rhapsody now is it. I hope u feel the wrath of apples legal team.
Firefox on my Linux box seems to draw the webpage badly…
I have the same problem with Camino on OSX. It shows up fine with Safari though, so it may be that the Mozilla rendering engine doesn’t like your CSS/HTML combination.
If you’re intending to release an updated version of Rhapsody based of Darwin, and hope to call it “Rhapsody”, you will have trouble, since Apple will most likely already own the trademarks to the name “Rhapsody”.
This is just stupid. If I have this correct (I find it hard to believe I do) they’re building on closed pirated software. They say they don’t condone illegal activities, yet they’re engaging in them.
Rhapsody is going absolutely nowhere, Apple stopped working on the x86 version, what, 6 years ago? If they want something like Mac on PC, why not work on intergrating Darwin and GNUstep into a solid OS?
Oh yeah and how many apps is there on Rhapsody x86? Like, 5 right?
I love YellowBox, but it’s development environment seems quite dated compared to Xcode. It’s a shame Apple didn’t keep up the cross platform toolkit. I don’t believe it is legal to distribute Rhapsody or YellowBox. It is possible to sell it to someone else, but that is a seat-for-seat transfer. You therefore cannot have people downloading it and expanding the user base. The same was true for YellowBox. In fact, it is illegal to make and ship software using YellowBox at this point. I really route for you guys, since I love Cocoa et cetera. However I think you are barking up the wrong tree. Good luck with your endevours though.
I find it funny that their main logo looks very similar to MFC’s graphic (or Inatech from Office Space the movie)
http://129.142.201.212/rhapsody/cubes.png
“I find it funny that their main logo looks very similar to MFC’s graphic (or Inatech from Office Space the movie)”
That ones Apple’s logo. I think it’s supposed to represent frameworks or something, maybe a pun off the NeXT logo.
Hi everyone!
I hate MACOS X because it just poorly bad. I love MACOS 8 and 9 because they where easy to use and user friendly. The only issue with MACOS 8&9 was stably. But what point of having a stable os if the systems is hard to use. and poorly designed. like networking a printer to use a dos formated disk was easyer on MAC 8 & 9. MACOS X can’t read dos formated disk. and that not all when we network MACOS X to windows server it write all files all over the server hard disk. But if you can make user friend systems like MAC OS 8 with samba and able to look after tasks and shutdown programs when that lock up. That would be great and I hate Xf86 as it’s like using old windows where you have reboot to chage your screen. I hope you go good with project.
If we distributed any of the files – yes… you would all we right – we would indeed be breaking the law, however the funny fact which many seems to have missed is that we DON’T. Besides Rhapsody is just a word – and even though Windows have had two cases with this now, and 1 is lost and 1 is won – I thik that with the current law we would be able to keep the word, that is ofcourse if we used it. We do NOT distribute a CD with something we call Rhapsody OS – our site is NOT entitled Rhapsody only – it’s Rhapsody-Project… should they want it can we always change our name – that doesn’t matter at all to me. Anyway our fixpacks wont even get a name related to Rhapsody – lol – we might call’em “1”, “2” and “3”. Now were is this illegal now ? Now when we say that we don’t (re)distribute their stuff ( the links are either broken or refer to a # at the site ) – We might be missing something, but please could people post some which we could use and now just “HA this is illegal – cause it is in my world”
-Daxziz
That would be great and I hate Xf86 as it’s like using old windows where you have reboot to chage your screen.
That’s false! On most newer systems you can change screen resolution without restarting X, let alone rebooting anything. In my computer I go Applications/Desktop Preferences/Screen Resolution and I can choose there.
Hi everyone!
I hate MACOS X because it just poorly bad. I love MACOS 8 and 9 because they where easy to use and user friendly. The only issue with MACOS 8&9 was stably. But what point of having a stable os if the systems is hard to use. and poorly designed. like networking a printer to use a dos formated disk was easyer on MAC 8 & 9. MACOS X can’t read dos formated disk. and that not all when we network MACOS X to windows server it write all files all over the server hard disk. But if you can make user friend systems like MAC OS 8 with samba and able to look after tasks and shutdown programs when that lock up. That would be great and I hate Xf86 as it’s like using old windows where you have reboot to chage your screen. I hope you go good with project.
Your crazy and closed minded. if your OS X wont read dos diskettes and write file habitably to servers you have a virus or something dont shun the OS because you have a defunct install. mine wont write files to my smb servers and reads dos diskettes fine
That’s NeXT’s old NeXTSTEP/OPENSTEP imagery.
Who came up with the great idea of a 200 pixel or so high frame with the document instead of filling the whole webpage? The same one who didn’t wanted to promote any illegal activities but posted bittorrent links?
In most cases change video display is nightmare in most cases you have reboot. like for e.g in knoppix. And in MACOS 10.3 that come with 3 emac pc we got out of the box, we try networking with our Windows based Server and after we open the share folder. mac os X put new folders all over the share folder with information about the files and so on. like old mac os did when it access a dos disk. Also talk on topic of MAC OS X we also found the os not as stable as it say’s from apple in fact lock up we found out was normal and unlike MAC OS 8 or Windows when MAC OS X lock up in program. The program stop’s working. And when I called up apple about this issue I was tell to format my hard disk. and this was not one time but to date I had to do it 3 times in 3 months.
This project has no future in the long run. Without the source code, it’s hard to make fixes in the core, even less substantial improvements. The day will come when this thing doesn’t run on recent hardware (the BeOS 5 PE-based distributions have the same problem). Or how will that project support my FX5200?
Wouldn’t it be smarter to start with a Darwin/x86 or Linux core and XFree86 (that should take care of the video driver problem) and start writing a Rhapsody/MacOS-style UI for that?
why didn’t you put the torrent files on suprnova.org?
yeah why is nobody helping the development of sheepshaver instead it seems like a better bet
as its open source and it allready boots macos 8.6
for now it works under linux but alot of people a trying to port it to win
“This project has no future in the long run. Without the source code, it’s hard to make fixes in the core, even less substantial improvements. The day will come when this thing doesn’t run on recent hardware (the BeOS 5 PE-based distributions have the same problem). Or how will that project support my FX5200?
Wouldn’t it be smarter to start with a Darwin/x86 or Linux core and XFree86 (that should take care of the video driver problem) and start writing a Rhapsody/MacOS-style UI for that?”
Why do you assume their is no source code?
And Darwin/x86 is taking the place of the outdated Mach that’s there now. It’s not about the UI as much as the development environment.
You must be an idiot! I’ve used x86 most my life and just started using OS X when 10.1 came out. I have not had any of the troubles you speak of with it crashing. When an app locks up try doing a command+option+esc , selecting the crashed app, and killing it; or if your ‘nix inclined open terminal , look application , sudo kill -9 appProcessNumber . There is no excuse for you having these kind of problems. Also as far as the extra file/folder thing goes, you need to realize how apple stores things using fork. They store the resource file (starts with a “.”) separate from the data file of the same name. You’ll have to expect those files to be there for it to work right again on a mac. You don’t like seeing them?! Just turn on hide system files on your windows box and you’ll only see the data files and not the “.” resource files. Rhapsody will have the same problem when finished because of the resource fork. Don’t be an idiot and learn how to speak proper english please.
Also this Rhapsody project reeks of illegality. It seems to me that this is developed by punks that just want to have their way no matter what; whether it is illegal or not is non of their concern. I’d love to see OS X on an x86 but only by dong so through legal means. Apple has provided us those means with Darwin. Don’t be lazy! Just start work off of what we have legally and you can accomplish your goals. Better yet do a search on the web to see if others are already doing something akin to your goals and try and help them: this is the best and fastest approach often.
If you screw with rhapsody you could be screwing all the legal stuff up for the rest of us! Apple might just change their mind about us programmers and decide that we won’t even get what they’ve given us so far. Be more responsible please. Stop acting like spoiled brats.
If you screw with rhapsody you could be screwing all the legal stuff up for the rest of us!
Apple is not releasing code for the benefit of the community, they do it so open source programmers can create innovations that Apple can use. It is a mutually beneficial arrangement that Apple would be stupid to change.
Will someone please explain how patching old software (not distributing it) is illegal?
If this is illegal, then how is it that Yellowtab can get away with it with Zeta, which seems to me to be the closest thing to this project.
As far as OS X is concerned, I wouldn’t submit my poor x86 to that. That would be abuse. I’m amazed that Apple actually made Unix usable, but the way they did it makes me want to throw it out a window. I’d prefer a minimal UI to a gaudy “lick me” one. Besides it’s still just a gui shell on top of a command line. (coughwin98cough)
Apple has something like 1% market share. As long as no one starts making iPod clones, I don’t think they’re going to care. And before I get flamed about install base being reality, yes I know the difference, but if no one is buying Macs the install base is not growing.
To bad Be died.
So, you don’t use a gui with your linux, or do you prefer the “minimal ui” of Windows XP? You have obviously never really used OS X. I am a long term Linux user and recently bought an older Mac (G3 Beige MT)to add to the collection of computers I’ve got. I upgraded it to G4 and installed Jaguar. I am very impressed with it. It has already done what Linux is on the road to doing. I now lust after a G5. Before any of you Linux guys start hollering read “OS X For Unix Geeks” by O’Reilly. OS X on PC would be my ultimate OS dream.
“As far as OS X is concerned, I wouldn’t submit my poor x86 to that. That would be abuse. I’m amazed that Apple actually made Unix usable, but the way they did it makes me want to throw it out a window. I’d prefer a minimal UI to a gaudy “lick me” one. Besides it’s still just a gui shell on top of a command line. (coughwin98cough) ”
z1xq is right, you must not have ever used OS X if you think its just a GUI shell on a command line.
“Apple has something like 1% market share. As long as no one starts making iPod clones, I don’t think they’re going to care. And before I get flamed about install base being reality, yes I know the difference, but if no one is buying Macs the install base is not growing.”
If no one is buying Macs, then no the installed base isn’t growing, but a small marketshare doesn’t mean no one is buying Macs, it just means that they buy PCs faster/more often. If there are 100 million computers sold in 2002, and 10 million are Macs then they have a 10% marketshare of overall sales. And in 2003 there are 200 million computers sold, and 15 million are Macs, then they have a 7.5% marketshare. That means that while their share got cut in half, their sales went up by a half, and their userbase went up by at minimum a half – if everyone who bought a Mac in 2002 bought another in 2003, which brings up the thing about Macs lasting longer. Blah blah blah, I won’t go into that part, but you get the picture.
Apple has something like 1% market share. As long as no one starts making iPod clones, I don’t think they’re going to care. And before I get flamed about install base being reality, yes I know the difference, but if no one is buying Macs the install base is not growing.
No, apparently you don’t know the difference. Having a 1% market share does not mean no one is buying Macs. In fact since 250-350 million computers were sold this year, that suggests a quite respectable 2.5-3.5 million Macs were sold this year. And in fact, the actual numbers reported by Apple are in the 3 million range.
I’d say the install base is growing.
“If this is illegal, then how is it that Yellowtab can get away with it with Zeta, which seems to me to be the closest thing to this project.”
BeOS was once distributed for free LEGALLY. Rhapsody was a developers only release so people could begin writing applications for MacOS X. If you did not sign an NDA in 1997, then you cannot legally use that OS.
It’s clear this project will never go anywhere. No serious programmer in thier right mind would want to touch this project with a ten foot pole.
>>Besides it’s still just a gui shell on top of a command line. (coughwin98cough)
You’re comparing UNIX to DOS 7? There’s a HUGE difference there sir. MS made a mistake with Win 2000 and Win XP by not having them run on top of a command line. It makes it very difficult to administer a system that is malfunctioning at the GUI level. But they didn’t have a choice, they couldn’t build a Win2000 or WinXP-level OS out of DOS. One could, however, build something more advanced than Windows XP out of a UNIX core, something Apple has demonstrated very well.
In short, MS had to get away from proper OS design because DOS sucked. Apple didn’t have that problem with the UNIX core. Personally I’ll take the window-manager-around-a-command-shell OS design over Microsoft’s current GUI-only design any day of the week. It just makes more sense. Apple was wise to get away from that with OS X. One reason MacOS 9 was so hated was because of its GUI-only design with no command shell to drop back into to do serious administration. It’s interesting that in the 90s, Apple was GUI-only and Windows was window-manager-around-a-shell, and now both are in the exact opposite position.
>>BeOS was once distributed for free LEGALLY. Rhapsody was a >>developers only release so people could begin writing >>applications for MacOS X. If you did not sign an NDA in >>1997, then you cannot legally use that OS.
Actually, Zeta is a set of add-ons with BeOS DANO, which is not the free, personal version of BeOS. Dano was never officially released, and it was meant to be a commercial product. Dano was “leaked” at some point, and many people use it. The current consenus is that Palm (the new owner of Be’s assets) just doesn’t care.
On the subject of the Rhapsody Project, if they could just make it boot on modern hardware, Athlon t-birds at least, that would be great. I need a new Hobby OS to play with.
There’s erally nothing to investigate. Publishing the files or building something based on the Rhapsody DR2 Release is of course completely illegal. Insanity or humour?
“There’s erally nothing to investigate. Publishing the files or building something based on the Rhapsody DR2 Release is of course completely illegal. Insanity or humour?
”
Neither of which are going on. There is NO distrobution of the OS or any of its parts in any way, shape, or form.
> Why do you assume their is no source code?
If there is source code of Rhapsody available, it is illegal to use it.
> And Darwin/x86 is taking the place of the outdated Mach
> that’s there now. It’s not about the UI as much as the
> development environment.
Darwin/x86 has very limited hardware support, and without support from the hardware vendors it’s very hard to write proper drivers. After all, this is what made it so hard for Be.
Who tells you that the Rhapsody binaries will run on Darwin, BTW?
And about the UI – I thought the main purpose of the project was to recreate the Mac OS user experience? How are you going to apply the necessary polish to Rhapsody (which is from what I have seen so far very rough at the edges) when you have no access to the internals of the UI?
I remember reading about Rhapsody in MacWorld back in 1997, and I absolutely loved it. It seemed to be so much more than both MacOS and *nix at the time. I would still like to try out RDR2 on x86, but I know drivers will be a major problem. To me this sounds like a cool project. If they will successfully create drivers for modern hardware and possibly even provide an updated march kernel for the system, I will put up a machine in some corer of my house where I can play with this beautiful system.
For those who still don’t know what Rhapsody looked like, I suggest you take a [url=http://www.pegasus3d.com/rhapsody/rhapsody_screens.html]guided tour[/url].