What is this post? Just a brief intro to Macs? Looks pretty neat, I've always wanted a Mac laptop myself, never had the cash though And isn't OS X unix-based. Not unix-like I'm looking forward to opengl 3 coming out anyway, that'll make it waaay easier to port games. Plus opengl games actually run well under wine
The kernal is based on mach, which was based on freeBSD, so yeah, its unix based. If you open up a terminal and stretch it to full screen with the dock hidden, you might as well be running any *nix distro. The beauty of OSX is that they put all their work into the usability of the applications and the desktop environment.
Mac OS X 10.6 to take advantage of GPU acceleration Mac OS X 10.6 to take advantage of GPU acceleration Source Just thought a bit of news was needed.
w00t! Go Apple! Sorry had to release a little energy. Am I the only Mac gamer on these forums? I'm not really an OS X (Well I do play an occasional BF2 game in OSX) gamer but definitely a Mac gamer. It seems like I am the only one lol. I'm probably just one of the first since the 8800's for the MacPro came out. *Edit: if there are any Mac gamers here (running vista or XP of course) I'd love to have some discussions about specific Mac hardware problems/tweaks. Or if anyone has questions specific to OS X & Mac hardware I'd be happy to help. I've been using Macs & PC's for years now & have lots of good OSX/Mac knowledge. Especially when it comes to Bootcamp & running other OS's on your hardware.
Well, I've been looking into osx86 more and more lately, and while my rig could easily run osx86 with no problems, what sucks is I'm selling it. However, there is some good news. After selling this, I am getting another machine! Not as fast as this one is, but will work, and should run osx86 and steam.(Steam for my games, like TF2). Now, the system I'm getting right after I sell mine, a Pentium d 820, 2048 ddr2, radeon x1800 XT, and I forgot what mobo, and don't feel like looking it up...From what I have now, it's a huge cut, but should run osx86 pretty decently. If not osx86, I'll just run Vista. But really hoping this works for me. I'll keep updating on progress!
Eh, not much as I used to be. I haven't really had the time to lately. Well, what sucks is the mobo I have now, is based on the via platform, and Via and osx86 doesn't work out so well. So, I have to get another distro, since the one I have doesn't have any type of kext for via chipsets, so it won't complete it's installation. Later, I want to get another mobo when the budget supports it.
Oh lol I just realized that's not your main computer either. oops. duh! you're just doing it on the side right?
Yeah, I thought I had to sell my main rig to pay some bills, but luck was with me on that one. So this went from being my main rig, to just a side project now. But, it is fun to do, and if it runs right on it, I'll keep on it the second rig. Well first update, I have osx86 downloaded and installed, 10.5.6 and everything. Now, there are some issues with this. Issues that were fixed. Which, these are common issues. 1.Video. X1800 XT did not have support out of the box. Easy fix, with natit, and device IDs installed into my kext files. 2.Audio, sound board on the mobo had no support at all, and lucky for me SoundBlaster cards just got support, and I had a sound blaster live laying around, and it's installed and works great. Issues that I'm looking at to fix right now...D: Well, it's only 1 right now. Whenever I try to extract anything from a .dmg file, I have a kernel panic. From what I read, this is caused by the mix of a new voodoo kernel, and an unmatched version of a seatbelt kernel. So, what I need to do is grab the 10.5.5 update, extract the kernel, then replace it with the new seatbelt kernel, and it should be fine. We'll see though.
Fully working now! Problems were ironed out, no issues with the system. Sleep, shutdown, reset, all work too. I've got QE/CI, and full res change!
I think Macs deserve their own section in the forums instead of a thread which is hard to talk on since I don't actually know what the conversations are atm. There's many things that you can talk about for a Mac same w/ the PC. deltatux
Agreed. Calling a forum 'Guru3D' doesn't necessarily limit it to PCs, now does it? I have several macs. :thumbup:
Well, if it had its own Mac section, I'm pretty sure ppl would know and would automagically post Mac stuff. Right now I'm typing this post on my college's new Mac Pros in the library, and it's making my dual-core desktop feel like a Pentium 133. It has 8 cores, like wtf? I'm still working my butt off to try to squeeze a quad-core into my machine >.<"!! deltatux
Half of the other sections here already don't have any activity. deltatux-That's actually a very very wrong thing to say. It does have 8 cores, but at the same time, it doesn't. It has 2 quad core cpus, which the end count equals out to 8 cores. That's all. A program will never take advantage of all of those cores, because programs can't take advantage of multiple cpus. It's nice to have, but it's not needed at all.
I know the Mac Pro has 2 quad core, that I don't deny, to a computer it's still an octocore in terms of power so it really doesn't matter ... but I actually have seen Photoshop render faster (by how much I don't know) than on any machines I've seen so far, esp. when I peek over to the artsy guys (I'm a computer science student). deltatux
Seriously, I haven't read as much rubish in a long time. If you're editing / encoding movies you'll use them. Photoshop utilises them, and OSX will assign processes to run on different cores, meaning even having PS, InDesign, Illustrator, Premiere & After Effects open, switching between them is extremely quick, and they run very fast when rendering too. I'm on my 8 core Mac Pro in work right now, and I'm telling you its well faster than my quad core PC at home, and its not down to the OS. (both have 4gb ram btw)
No programs can utilize 2 different cpus as one. That's one of the main advantages of multiple cores on one die, versus multiple cpus. Yes, Os X will allocate resources to a core of each cpu, I'm not saying it doesn't do that. Any OS does that with a multiple core system. What I'm saying, is there will never be one program that will use all of those cores at once. When comparing 2 machines together, you also compare the OS. Os X is going to have better multiple core management then Windows, because Leopard was built to run on the intel platform. And Os X in general is just smoother than windows, and doesn't use as much resources.
