PearPC: Apple Emulation On the PC

[GreNME]

On the front (http://www.grenme.com/) of the site, I wrote a little tech piece (http://www.grenme.com/node/view/10) (yes, I'm adding more content) about a new software development underway called PearPC. Basically, it's an emulator that can simulate the hardware architecture of a Macintosh computer so you can install and run the Mac operating system (OS X). I went over some very simplistic basics of it in the essay, and then talked about how I think it'll impact the computing industry in a very vague way (I think it's a Good Thing).

However, tonight, I figured I'd stick my money where my mouth was.

After a few snags, I managed to figure out a way to set it up so it can read Apple's CD file system, which Windows cannot do natively. Once I handled that little speed bump, I managed to work my way around a configuration file to get it ready to install on a simulated hard drive on my computer.

It's currently installing as we speak.

I'd post screenshots, but they really aren't any different than the couple I borrowed and used in my essay. However, this is really awesome, in my opinion. I know not everyone is the geek I am, and even other geeks have different ideas than I do about things, but I absolutely love the idea of being able to do this. I finally get to tinker with OS X without having to buy a Macintosh!

There are down sides, though. The networking features still don't work for Windows, so I can't get this puppy on the internet just yet. I'm hoping that gets fixed at a later date. Also, the speed on this is blindingly slow when working on it. Once again, that'll hopefully be mitigated with further development. The thing is, this is proof that it can be done, which hopefully means more attention for it from other sources.

This obviously doesn't resolve my desire to really get down and dirty with a Mac, but it's a start. I did manage to have an older iMac donated to me, and after a few repairs I should be able to get it working. Once I manage that, I should be able to get it working and integrated into my home network, and use that for further work and play. :) The up side to that is that I won't have to worry about trying to buy a used Mac laptop any time soon. Less cost is a definite plus for my broke ass.

So, I can vouch for anyone who has been hearing about this and thinking it's interesting that it does indeed work, it just takes some persistence and time to get working. The biggest obstacle I see is getting the install disks for OS X, which I had because of the aforementioned donation of a machine. If you're curious to try it, I say go for it! It's definitely an interesting experience.

[the twinkster]

The Steve has probably already held some public executions, and I'm sure he will in his wisdom be applying a healthy dose of the Apple Legal team to these folks. Pronto, too, I'll bet.

Apple likes everything to be on their terms.

That said, I don't see this having a noticeable effect on Apple, because the people who'll use it are (generalization ahead) enthusiast tinkerers who are unlikely to buy new Apple-branded hardware (aside, in some cases, from Windows iPods).

[GreNME]

See, that's where I disagree. I mean, I agree Steve-o will sic his team of rabid lawyers on these guys very soon, but I can only see this having a positive effect for Apple. After all, this is emulation we're talking about, not running natively. This means it naturally runs like ass, nowhere near how it will run on the real McCoy.

What it will do, however, is offer a better perspective on the differences between OS X and Windows. Now, they are very similar in many respects, but they are very different in how they get to those similarities. While Linux on the Desktop is a far cry away from being a consumer reality, an increase in sales for Apple is easily imaginable. In fact, the lower price of the G5s (as compared to the initial releases of G4s) can easily make this possible. All people have to do is work with the OS and see that it's not just some flaky, different-just-to-be-different type of OS that is really only tailored to a few artsy dorks. It ain't easier or better, but it's different about doind some things and it is the same in terms of a wide variety of features compared to Windows. That's not a bad sell, as long as people can test-drive it.

But even though I hear the "what about store displays" and other excuses, Macs are not that accessible for test driving unless you know someone who has one or you go to a school that has them. Touching a mouse and keyboard for two minutes in a store isn't going to convince many people. Working with it and getting used to how it does stuff is a better sell. This allows some low-end test driving while still keeping it from actually running in ful on competitors' hardware (technically).

Will Apple see it that way? Of course not. What company today would?

[the twinkster]

But how many people will try it? My prediction is "not enough to make a noticeable difference." It might help their 'mindshare' (ugh) by gaining them some credibility with enthusiasts, but it isn't going to sell many Macintoshes, IMO.

On a related note, I'm really starting to miss my G5. I need to book a plane ticket.

Edit:

Did you read Anand's weblog during his month-long G5 experiment? I found it really refreshing to read.

And now, to return to bed and try sleeping again.

[GreNME]

No, I never read Anand's experience. I'm willing to bet it was good, though. The G5 is some nice hardware (and reminds me constantly that I want to step up to 64-bit soon, not for the inherent advantages but for the sheer performance increases of the chips).

As for what good it will do: not a lot as it stands. However, this isn't even close to a feasably "finished" product. After the kinks are worked out, a proper installer and configurator can be rolled into a single package, and easily distributed. Once that happens, I can imagine a lot of people trying it out for the "neat" factor. There are plenty of non-geek-types who have at least tried Linux, but get turned off with the need for such hands-on work. OS X requires the same skill level as XP on many levels, and since it has so much more integrated, sometimes less. People can get a taste of this with emulation, which can easily lead to actual purchasing interest, even if it is a crappy eMac or a lower-priced iMac.

Despite current litigations against Microsoft, the average consumer prefers and loves having things all in one tidy and simple package. Apple already does this, but it has the image of being for artsy, dorky types (well, that and the elitist zealot). The way to change it isn't to do like Apple does and try to sell it as the next sliced bread, but an actual alternative to the main computer software out there—just as simple, just as powerful, just as versatile, and since OS X, just as compatible with virtually everything you'd use it for (because I've never like 9 and prior versions).

I can see why they don't though: it makes Macs seem less "special," mostly to the current user base, who often prides itself on being different. Nothing I've seen of OS X to date looks or works much different on the user end than Windows, the steps getting there are just sometimes different. So, why not let more people see that? It would sell a lot more were Macs accessible, and this makes them moreso, once they roll it into an installable package. However, I do see this as something that'll get cut off at the knees before it gets a chance to stand up.

[the twinkster]

Gotcha, I see what you're saying now. I agree with that.