×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Terra Soft Reveals Linux/PPC Hardware Solution

pudge posted more than 11 years ago | from the only-if-i-can-get-it-in-teal-or-raspberry dept.

Apple 192

Gentu writes "OSNews features an article revealing a new product from Terra Soft, makers of the popular PPC Linux distribution Yellow Dog Linux, which effectively enables YDL to run on its own platform. Terra Soft is offering a motherboard and a complete PC based on the 600MHz G3 (G4 is also planned). This is of course still PPC, but it ain't a Mac. However, the article hints that it might be technically possible to run Mac OS and Mac OS X via Mac-On-Linux." Prices start at about $500, with 1U rackmounts starting at $870.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

192 comments

fp? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4800788)

All your bases belong to Natalie Bortman.

Killing that first post groove... (2, Insightful)

zaren (204877) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800791)

Looks like a nice system. A little slow, but I guess there's more of the slower CPUs available these days, and it does keep the price down.

Trolling avoidance FAQ V1.1 (-1, Offtopic)

gazbo (517111) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800806)

Changelog:

V1.1 - Added Appendix-A for general posting guidelines suggested by AC (almost verbatim, minor html changes only)
V1.0b - First revision


Introduction:

Greetings Slashdot. I have noticed that trolls on Slashdot are having too easy a time recently, with the most random gibberish getting modded up and many child comments (bites) attached to it. This recent trouble can only realistically be due to an influx of newbies, so I have composed this FAQ to bring newbies up to speed and recognise trolls for the scum that they are.

On clichés:

I have deliberately elected to avoid the greatest cliché of FAQs, by not actually answering any questions, frequently asked or otherwise. Instead this will be an informative guide.

The FAQ:

Moderation :
This section gives guidelines on when to/when NOT to moderate.

  • Groupthink moderation: When deciding whether to moderate a post, take no cues from existing moderations. It is well known in the trolling (often referred to as 'trollerizing') community that the first moderation is critical; if somebody spots you as a troll, all subsequent moderations are likely to be troll. If, however, the first moderator mistakenly thinks it is insightful, then the rest of the moderators will think it is insightful too. Avoid this mentality and ignore current moderations entirely. Judge a post solely on its merits, ignoring what others think.
  • Follow the links: Related to the point above, a comment with links (often purporting to be a mirror or further information) will often get moderated very highly. It seems the mentality is that the comment has informative looking links, and is moderated as insightful, so it must be insightful, right? Wrong. All it takes is one moderator to assume it is legitimate and moderate it up, the rest of the moderators then partake in groupthink moderation. You will not. Click on all the links and read the linked articles. If they are informative, mod them up. If they are 'ghostsee links' (a horrific image of a distended anus) then mod them as trolls. If you do not wish to follow the links, then don't moderate the post. Simple.
  • Check the facts: If a post produces a mass of information, be it figures, quotes or whatever, check his sources! It may be that the figures are made up off the top of his twisted head; if no sources are offered and Google doesn't turn up anything, the chances are that it is made up. Scientists wouldn't believe a paper with no cited references. Follow the rules that should be becoming clear: if the information checks out and is informative, mod him up. If it totally doesn't check out and seems to be made up, mod him down. When in doubt? Don't moderate. And remember the golden rule - other people's moderations are no guide to veracity. Avoid groupthink moderation.
  • What's in a name: Do not moderate people up based on their name. There are two facets to this:
    1. If somebody writes a shit comment, it deserves modding down. Just because Alan Cox happened to write it makes it no more insightful than if 'Peg Troll' wrote it. Do not moderate up famous people.
    2. ...And it probably isn't them. Does $famousPerson even post on Slashdot? Are you sure that's how they spell their name? Does the name say 'Alan Cox' or 'by Alan Cox'? The latter of the two is very hard to spot in context. Check their UID - then check their posting history. Check that they are who they say they are. Even if they are, you should generally not moderate them based on their fame unless it is because they are commenting on an area in which they have specialist knowledge.
  • What's in a name revisited: Do not moderate them up because they are female. Firstly, they are almost certainly men pretending to be females exploiting this weakness that I am now advising you of. Secondly, even if they are female, even if they would like you because you modded them up, moderation is ANONYMOUS. Remember, moderate up the quality of the post and trolls are scuppered from the start.
  • Opinions: Feel free to moderate up personal opinions - just don't do it solely because they agree with your point of view. If it is well argued, eloquent, mod it up. If it is badly argued, a stereotype taken to extremes, mod it down. If it takes things too far but happens to agree with your point of view, it is likely a troll looking for your kneejerk mod. Even if it's not, it doesn't deserve modding up as it takes things too far.
Commenting :
This section gives guidelines on when to and when not to reply to a comment. This will cover several of the points made in the moderation section.
  • Groupthink moderation: You see a comment at +5 Insightful and yet discover it is a 'ghostsee link'. It may be appropriate here to post a simple reply warning people of this fact. Do not criticise the groupthink moderation else you will be modded down yourself. It will also cause delight for the troll who knows that your voice will be drowned out by being modded down, whilst his post is sitting comfortably at +5.
  • Check the facts: Much the same as with moderation. If the facts don't check out, ignore him; he is a troll. Don't point out it is made up, it is up to the moderators to remove noise from the strong signal of Slashdot. If it gets modded up, that is not your problem; the moderator needs guiding to this FAQ. If you cannot draw conclusive evidence either way, simply ask for sources - if he's a troll he'll not reply. If it's a genuine post and he can't come up with any then he is too stupid to discuss with. If he comes up with sources then proceed to post an equally well reasoned argument and continue the well constructed debates that makes Slashdot what it is.
  • What's in a name: Do not reply to somebody because they are famous. A vacuous response to Alan Cox will not get you recognised in the community. He will not reply with "Here's a crazy idea, why don't you help maintain the VM?" even if he is the real thing. You will look like a foolish fanboy, especially if it turns out it was a troll.
  • What's in a name revisited: Same as above. Nobody has ever got a shag on Slashdot by replying to a female, especially by pathetically defending 'her' against all attacks. Remember - 98% of Slashdot is male. 80% of the remainder do not comment. 80% of that remainder will not have a clearly identifiable female name. If you are talking to a female name, it is almost certain it is a male troll. And there is nothing more satisfying to troll than seeing a clueless 'slashrobot' trying to socialise with a woman they've never met based purely on gender. Especially when the gender is wrong.
  • Opinions: If their opinions are completely wacky and over the top, even if they agree with you, do not reply. They are almost certainly trolls and even if they weren't it should be clear that you will not have a rational argument.
  • Factual inaccuracies: If someone makes a host of simple mistakes, it is probably a troll and needs no correction. For example, if somebody is discussing the inner workings of the Linux virtual memory system and they refer to Linux 8.0, it is a fair guess that they know the difference between a kernel and a distribution. This means that the post is a troll; do NOT correct him, that is what he was after when he wrote it. Here is a list of things to look out for:
    • Linux 8 - as discussed, there is nobody on Slashdot who doesn't know the difference between the kernel and Redhat.
    • Lunix - nobody posts this accidentally. Yes, we all know that there is a different OS called Lunix and you pointing it out is not clever - the troll will be even more happy with this than a plain correction.
    • O(log n) - if someone gets the big-o expression for an algorithm or process wrong, think how that came to be. They made it up off the top of their head. People can have opinions on many things, but they cannot be of the opinion that the TSP is O(n log n) - it is just wrong. The only exception is if somebody tentatively suggests that they vaguely remember that it might be O(...) but they aren't sure.
    • Dijkstra - this man was a genius, but even he could not invent as many algorithms as trolls attribute to him.
    • GPL - Anybody asserting that their lawyers told them X about the GPL where you know X to be wrong. If this man had really consulted lawyers, do you think that the lawyers would get wrong that which you got right?
    That was just a sample - I hope to come up with a more definitive list sometime in the near future.

I hope that helped, any contributions will be gladly received as a reply to this comment. One last rule:

Never EVAR start a comment with "I know you're a troll but..." This is trolling gold dust. Nothing is better than somebody saying that they are too smart to be fooled by you and then writing a 1000 word point-by-point rebuttal.


Appendix A: General posting guidelines by AC [slashdot.org]


You are not funny if you post these "jokes":

  • All your base are belong to us
  • Can you imagine a Beowulf cluster of these
  • Natalie Portman and hot grits
    1. something
    2. something
    3. ???
    4. profit

  • If someone says, for example, "please stop posting 'All your base' -jokes", don't respond with an 'All your base' -joke

Don't post Microsoft bashing comments on stories that have nothing to do with Microsoft. Also, if you talk about Microsoft, write Microsoft or MS, not Micro$oft, M$, MicroShit, MicroShaft, MickeySoft of any variation of these.

Learn the difference between its/it's, there/they're/their, effect/affect, your/you're and ridiculous/rediculous. Just by learning those five groups, you'll be able to avoid 90% of the annoying Slashdot typos.

Re:Killing that first post groove... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4801467)

Uh, yeah. ONLY $495 for a freaking Mobo and CPU. I can get x86 for under $100. I like the idea, but the cost is still excessive for commodity hardware.

Re:Killing that first post groove... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4802680)

Keep the price down? The motherboard and CPU look to be over $450! I can get a very nice Soyo or Asus board and a high end AMD Athlon chip for much cheaper than that and it would run absolute circles around a 600MHz G3!

But... (2)

ryochiji (453715) | more than 11 years ago | (#4802722)

I wonder who the target audience for this is. I mean, if you want a cheap Linux box, you can get a WalMartPC (or other generic brand) for half the price. If you want a Mac, well, it only says that these machine can run MacOS X in theory, and considering how you could get a used PowerMac G3 for about the same price (or an iBook for $200 more), it doesn't seem like it's really worth it.

I hope they sell some of the machines though. After all, choice is always a good thing.

OS X (2, Interesting)

mschoolbus (627182) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800795)

I would LOVE to use Mac OSX at home. The only problem is buying that expensive Apple hardware, maybe this would be a good solution...

Re:OS X (5, Interesting)

anothermortal (577394) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800831)

Macs are only expensive if you buy the Dual Processor models, or the UberCool G4 Titanium Powerbook (portable space heater). Recall the recent price drop on the iBooks? The low-end model is only $999. Add a bit for some extra RAM, and you have a nice, decent Mac OSX box for home. iBooks are inexpensive, and I believe, a good deal when compared to similar priced PC laptops.

Re:OS X (1, Offtopic)

rseuhs (322520) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800969)

Well, the problem is that iMacs suck.

I would take any of those systems (with PCI-slots, with serial ports and most importantly without an attached monitor) over any iMac anytime.

You can't get a real computer at Apple near 1000$ unfortunately.

the 17" widescreen model is nice... (2)

green pizza (159161) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801022)

the 17" widescreen iMac is quite nice... but not for $2000. I wish it was available with a plain DVD-ROM/CD-RW "combo" drive rather than the DVD-RW/CD-RW "superdrive", though. Save a few bucks that way.

It's a temping little machine, in fact it's almost moreso an executive system than a home/school machine. But right now I can get a refurbished single cpu G4 tower and a 19" samsung DVI monitor for the same price.

Re:OS X (5, Informative)

Gropo (445879) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801152)

I'm looking at a whole slew of closed PowerMac auctions on ebaY... 800's go for around $1200 on average... You can even buy Apple logic boards for a little over $120 and roll your own:

$120 Logic Board

$80 Hard drive

$499 800 Mhz PowerPC daughtercard (2Mb DDR L3 cache!)

$130 Power Supply

$50 SDRAM

Total: $879

Re:OS X (2, Insightful)

dpaton.net (199423) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801186)

Gee, he wasn't even talking about an iMac. He was talking about an iBook. See, it's a laptop, and a very usable one at that. Veeeeery different from them CRT based thingies (I hate 'em too). If you need PCI slots and serial ports buy a generic x86 mobo and fight with IRQs. If you want a UNIX system that just works, and has actual desktop usability, drop a grand and buy an iBook.

-dave

Re:OS X (1)

anothermortal (577394) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801276)

Exactly. iBooks work great. Infact, over Thanksgiving, I did an NFS install of Mandrake on an old NEC Ready120LT laptop, using my iBook as the NFS server. They are lightweight and portable, while still retaining functionality. And thank-you for also noticing I said *iBook*, not *iMac*.

Re:OS X (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4801462)

I wondered why he responded with the iMac comment as well... Then realized it was in retaliation to the 'only the Dual systems are expensive' sentiment.

Re:OS X (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4801445)

I can't agree more. We bought an iBook just 3 months ago and have been really really happy with it. The price was higher then, but it was still and excellent return in performance to price. I spend more time actually doing things, instead of trying to figure out why the damn firewire card in the pc doesn't want to talk to the camera. Or even downloading the additional software I have come to believe should be a standard nobrainer (ssh, perl).

This has been the only time I have spent that much money on a computer and been able to say it was worth it. When I upgraded my older celeron 366 to a 500 for $10 the return was almost not worth it.

Re:OS X (1)

marklark (39287) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801667)

ssh and perl are part of the standard distribution of Mac OS X.

There are also programs that implement them available as freeware for Mac OS 9.

Re:OS X (2)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801503)

Macs are only expensive if you buy the Dual Processor models, or the UberCool G4 Titanium Powerbook (portable space heater). Recall the recent price drop on the iBooks? The low-end model is only $999.

Hmmmm, I think we have different definitions of "inexpensive". My desktop machine cost me £250 as it was an upgraded box I bought dirt cheap, and it's a pretty fast. There's "cheap" and then there's "cheap". You'd be surprised just how cheaply you can get computers if you try a bit and know where to look/who to talk to.

Re:OS X (2)

io333 (574963) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801663)

I modded the above comment up for the following reasons:

1. The autopackage link.

2. Use them or lose them!

Re:OS X (4, Funny)

Archie Steel (539670) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801842)

And, by posting this comment, you voided any moderation you might have done to other comments for this story...

Re:OS X (1)

anothermortal (577394) | more than 11 years ago | (#4802145)

True, but thats comparing a desktop system to a laptop system. Forgive the pun, but that's comparing apples to oranges. If I wanted a desktop system, I would have bought one. Not to mention the wonderful feeling I have when I open my iBook and it *works*. And yes, $999 for a *new* laptop (from any manf.) is a good price.

Booting Mac OS isn't technically possible. (1)

Kplusplus (617856) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801428)

You won't be. The only reason Mac-On-Linux works is because the macs they are being run on actually have the Mac ROM chip that enables 9 and X to work. AFAIK without that ROM neither system will boot.

So It isn't technically possible to run Mac OS anything on these without having an Apple Mac ROM, and we all know if you have that sans a real Mac, Apple will come to beat you down with thier big legal sticks. So they should be happy they can't run the Mac OS.

P.S. Even the old style iMacs which you can still purchase, outperform these machines.

Re:Booting Mac OS isn't technically possible. (1)

Stonent1 (594886) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801547)

I was under the assumption that after the Macs went "new world" the rom file was part of the OS. There is a MacOS Rom file in the system folder of classic systems. Sure there is an OpenBoot "ROM" but I don't think it by itself supports classic mac OS without the file.

No more boot chip in MacOS (4, Informative)

Bobartig (61456) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801689)

You DO know that MacOS no longer uses a hardware bootrom, right? And that you CAN copy the bootROM off of any MacOSX install.

MacOnLinux actually comes with documentation telling you how to do this, since some people can have trouble getting to bootrom to load off the OSX partition, so they copy it to their linux partition, then tell MOL to load it from there.

Re:No more boot chip in MacOS (1)

mkldev (219128) | more than 11 years ago | (#4802482)

And that you CAN copy the bootROM off of any MacOSX install.

s/MacOSX/Mac OS 9

Mac OS X doesn't come with the ROM file. That's installed as part of installing Mac OS 9 (which was on a separate CD for older Mac OS X boxed sets, and isn't even included in current ones).

But you're right, you don't need the ROM to boot Mac OS X. Just to boot Mac OS 9/Classic, and even then, it's in a file.

Re:OS X (3, Insightful)

b1t r0t (216468) | more than 11 years ago | (#4802274)

You do realize this is $500 just for the bare motherboard? And it's a G3 600 at that? You'd be better off getting a G3 off of ebay or a Mac reseller site like MacResQ [macresq.com]. (I gave that as an example it's the one I can remember.) They currently have a G3/400 blue&white with 128 meg RAM, 6G hard disk, and DVD-ROM for $530. Lose a few megahertz, get RAM and a hard drive for $30 more. They also have various G4/450 systems for $900.

And you don't have to wait until January for them to be released, either.

OT: 1U Unix Collection (2, Offtopic)

green pizza (159161) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800797)

I'm not sure it's something I'll rush out to buy, but it does sound interesting, if for no other reason than to add another dev/compile server to the stack we have at work.

Cobalt RaQ 4, IBM B50, generic 1U PC, Sun Netra X1, Apple Xserve.

Now if only SGI would make a 2P, 1U server. How thick is SGI's 4P Origin 300? 2U?

Come and troll on www.linux.lu/forum (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4800805)

This forum has not yet seen any trolls. Its users are bored. Come and register here [linux.lu], and troll the hell out of the luxuryburgers.

Re:Come and insightful on www.linux.lu/forum (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4800830)

This forum has not yet seen any insight. Its users are bored. Come and register here [linux.lu], and insightful the hell out of the luxuryburgers.

Re:Come and insightful on www.linux.lu/forum (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4801313)

Hey, I said insightful, not offtopic!

Perhipials (2, Offtopic)

e8johan (605347) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800809)

It is nice to see that the PCI bus is now commonly used in *all* desktop computers (Atari, Amiga, Mac and IBM Compatibles). This makes it so much easier to buy devices and to find/port drivers. I remember Atari's old HDD interface that forced me into buying a really expensive Atari HDD instead of a much cheaper IDE driver...

Re:Perhipials (2)

Gropo (445879) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800904)

True, at least there was a semblance of competition in the peripheral market for Mac NuBus/PDS cards... Still kinda sucked though... ;) Glad Apple went mixed-endian a few years back.

Re:Perhipials (2)

Biolo (25082) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801892)

and IBM RS/6000, UltraSparc's, SGI's, DEC^H^H^H Compaq ^H^H^H^H^H^H^ HP Alpha.

64bit 66MHz variant PCI is quite common on even the highest end Unix servers - even on the big Starcat (F15K) Sun's

BTW - just how old was this Atari? I had an ST and stuck on a common SCSI hard disk (50Mb, those were the days!).

Re:Perhipials (1)

mkldev (219128) | more than 11 years ago | (#4802522)

HDD? Hard disk drive?

Last I recall, the Atari machines (at least the ST series) used ACSI....

Versus orginal MAC hardware. (2, Interesting)

His Nastiness (542696) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800817)

I'm curious if anyone knows if the FULL range of MAC apps run under MAC on linux. It's great if these apps run native or near native speed on this hard/software combo but I think it would be prudent to wait until the G4 version is available just for the power. Also, is this competitive, price wise, with say, buying an old G3?

not an acronym (3, Informative)

green pizza (159161) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800858)

I hate to nitpick... but it's "Mac", not "MAC".

Mac is short for Macintosh, a series of computers sold by Apple Computer Inc.

Re:not an acronym (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4801017)

You are the reason people hate geeks, going around acting like something this insignificant is worthy of any sort of comment.

I can't imagine your definition of 'relevant'.

Re:not an acronym (4, Funny)

green pizza (159161) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801049)

You are the reason people hate geeks, going around acting like something this insignificant is worthy of any sort of comment.

You say that like it's a bad thing...

What's the point? (5, Insightful)

g4dget (579145) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800818)

For the same amount of money, you get PC hardware that is considerably faster. And Linux on x86 runs a lot more software than Linux on PPC.

In fact, probably even the new EPIA-M [mini-itx.com] board is a better deal for many applications; the EPIA-M costs $160 with processor, uses a 933MHz C3 (Pentium compatible), is tiny, and uses comparatively little power. And if you buy one of those, you don't even give money to the other monopoly [intel.com].

Re:What's the point? -- GEEK-CHIC (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4800861)

Did you really have to ask what the point of this hardware is?

Did you really?

Re:What's the point? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4800912)

933MHz C3
???
All bases belong to bortman.

Re:What's the point? (2)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801092)

c3 is at the wrong end of the cool'o'scale.

c3. - other end..
g3. - somewhere between.
z3. - at the other end of the scale.

now, would you rather have a c3-via or z3-bmw?

the via is nice but it's slooooooooooooooow. you can get a 1300mhz duron+motherboard for the same money(with integ yadda yaddas, only being slightly bigger mATX)!

Re:What's the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4801368)

Funny how you complain about how slow a c3 is, yet rave over a z3, which performance wise, is the c3 of cars.

Re:What's the point? (2)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 11 years ago | (#4802798)

** Funny how you complain about how slow a c3 is, yet rave over a z3, which performance wise, is the c3 of cars.**

no, sir, THIS is the C3 of cars: http://www.autointell.com/european_companies/psa/c itroen/citroen-c3/citroen-c3-01.htm [autointell.com]

there's other z3's than the down of the line runner.. i wouldnt mind the 321hp version..
though i'm not a bmw fan myself.. z3 just fit better than putting 156gta to the scale-o-cool..

Re:What's the point? (5, Insightful)

jmu1 (183541) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801117)

One acronym: DRM.

It's coming, and in hardware form. These companies are small enough to give a rat's ass about what it's customers want. Next time I purchase hardware for myself... it's going to be PPC.

Re:What's the point? (1)

archivis (100368) | more than 11 years ago | (#4802059)

Was.

Did.

Was an improvement actually, but that's neither here nor there.

Your statement is not condusive to much.

Re:What's the point? (2)

jmu1 (183541) | more than 11 years ago | (#4802330)

I'm sorry, are we even talking about the same thing here?

I'm speaking of the Digital Restrictions Management systems that will be in place on Intel-based motherboards soon. I doubt that manufacturers of PPC motherboards will even bother to persue the DRM avenue, mainly because they will lack sufficient funding to support licensing the technology from whomsoever becomes the defacto DRM provider.

As for being pertinent to the conversation at hand, I am addressing the "What's the point" issue. My answer to what the point of buying hardware that is not as cheap as x86 hardware is the imminent DRM fiasco that we all, as users of computers, face. I'd like to still be able to use FreeSoftware, so... I'll use someone else's hardware if I need to.

Re:What's the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4801203)

Because the C3 is a toy. Hell, the site you linked has people making toasters out of it. Sure, some clock on it oscillates faster. But I don't even want to get into that argument. Taking the other guy's car analogy, you can have your car that gets 8k RPM. At 40 MPH. Enjoy.

Re:What's the point? (2)

Gropo (445879) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801284)

For the same amount of money, you get PC hardware that is considerably faster.
Faster? Perhaps.
More power efficient? Not a chance.
Cooler(temp.)? No way.
More efficient architecture? Good gravy, no!
Utilizable SIMD core? Oh bugger.

Why we even need to have "Mhz/cost is far from the bottom line" arguments on /. in late 2002 is completely beyond me...

Re:What's the point? (4, Informative)

MarcQuadra (129430) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801783)

I've got an EPIA here, running @ 800Mhz, and a G3 at 400, the G3 kicks the bejeezus out of the EPIA hands-down. You can't compare apples and oranges here. Also, GCC isn't NEARLY well suited for obscure chips like the C3 as it is for the mature and very-well documented PPC series (remember, Apple and IBM are both running on breeds of PPC and both have been investing in GCC/Open Source development on the platform). VIA isn't shelling out millions to get GCC to produce highly optimized code on the C3 CPU.

Re:What's the point? (4, Insightful)

MissMyNewton (521420) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801848)


And Linux on x86 runs a lot more software than Linux on PPC

And using that logic, why bother with Linux when Windows run LOTS LOTS LOTS LOTS LOTS more software than Linux on X86...

Re:What's the point? (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801947)

Now as I understand the problem with VIA EDEN is that it is single-tasking, not superscalar... Doesn't the C3 have the same problem? If so a 500MHz Pentium II is probably faster for most things than a 933MHz C3...

tiny cpu heatsink/fan (1)

green pizza (159161) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800823)

Anyone else notice how small the CPU heatsink and fan is on that PPC mobo? I guess it is only 600 MHz and it's the newer G3.

But still... it's smaller than the little heatsink/fan on my PC's motherboard chipset!

interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4800963)

i find that tidbit interesting, why was this modded down?

Re:tiny cpu heatsink/fan (1)

Simon Lyngshede (623138) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801043)

What I don't get is why they need the fan. Why don't they just slap on a bigger heatsink.
I don't like fans in my computer, they're noisy. Loss the fan and they got a nice system.

Btw, my 933MHz C3 doesn't need a fan, just a big fat Zalman heatsink :-)

Re:tiny cpu heatsink/fan (2)

green pizza (159161) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801096)

What I don't get is why they need the fan. Why don't they just slap on a bigger heatsink.
I don't like fans in my computer, they're noisy. Loss the fan and they got a nice system.


True, that. Would be even cooler if they'd use the PPC 750FX. That would bring the on-die L2 cache up to 512 KB plus would use even less power due to the smaller process, smaller die size.

Re:tiny cpu heatsink/fan (2)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 11 years ago | (#4802712)

1u.

i think that wraps that up as to 'why they didnt use a taller/bigger sink without fan'.

they mention they'll (try) to sell the newer chip later..

Re:tiny cpu heatsink/fan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4801314)

Yep the fan is small - but did you see the promo shot of the case! How many fan holes does that 600MHz PPC sucka need? Seriously, even my Athlon in the same case doesn't need a side mounted extractor fan.

Re:tiny cpu heatsink/fan (2)

MarcQuadra (129430) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801897)

Did you also notice how much 'cleaner' the board looks? Boards get pretty when you don't have to pump 100 watts of juice to the CPU. The beauty of the PPC architecture is in it's SIMPLICITY. I find almost everything is better on the RISC side of the fence.

Apple heatsinks.... Re:tiny cpu heatsink/fan (2)

johnpaul191 (240105) | more than 11 years ago | (#4802104)

Apple desktops really do not get hot inside. Maybe some of the really fast ones do now, but the G3 is cooler running than the G4 (hence the G4 TiBooks being hot). Even the new windtunnel G4s are not supposed to be really hot... just some planning for the future (and bad choice of fans according to people who have swapped them out).

any G4 i have opened and poked or licked (ok, not licked) while running "processor intensive" things (yeah yeah i know.... bad me) has been very cool.... my G4 heatsink is as cool as anything else in the box (1 case fan and 1 fan in powersupply). When people say the PPC chips use less power and generate less heat they are not kidding. My housemate has older Intel boxes (running Linux and BSD, it's ok) and they literally raise the temp of his room.... my G4 blows cold air out the back. go figure.

offhand i don't think anything from Apple has had a fan on the processor.... even the newest dual 1.25GHz machines have a fan blowing across the heatsink on the processors, but nothing like the standard Intel/AMD thing of the mini fan attached to the chip itself. i guess that is part of the reason Macs are generally quieter (if they have a fan at all)..... those mini fans have a terrible sound. i disabled the one on my Radeon7500 because it sounded like a food processor full of gravel. the case is cool enough that it didn't seem to matter anyway.

SPEC marks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4800833)

So, how many SPECfp2000 and SPECint2000 do you get out of a 600MHz G3? How much cache does it have on the chip and on the board? What speed of RAM does it take?

Specs (5, Informative)

green pizza (159161) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800940)

It's the IBM PowerPC 750CXe [ibm.com].

This is the slightly older version of the PPC 750 "G3". This 750 CXe model has 256 KB of on-die L2 cache and is fabbed at a .18 micron process.

The newer 750 FX model (as used in the current Apple iBooks) has 512 KB of on-die L2 cache and is fabbed at .13 micron with all of the buzzwords (silicon-on-insulator, etc).

I belive this board uses PC133 RAM. 133 MHz x 4.5

From the MOL FAQ (5, Interesting)

pwagland (472537) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800839)

Q: Does MOL run on non-Apple hardware?

A: It does. MOL runs for instance on the Pegasos board, the Teron board and on AmigaOne hardware. In short, MOL should run on any PowerPC hardware (with the except of 601-based systems). However, the EULA of MacOS prohibits its usage on non-Apple hardware (it is of course perfectly legal to use MOL to boot a second Linux though).

This means it might be technically possible to run MACOS on this thing, but it is also technically illegal!

Re:From the MOL FAQ (1)

Kplusplus (617856) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801495)

It shouldn't be tenchinally possible since the Mac OS has always required the Mac ROM to be present in order to run. Unless MOL comes with one it shouldn't be possible. Furthermore if MOL does come with one, Apple would have sued them long ago, so what is the story on how come they can run the Mac OS?

Re:From the MOL FAQ (2)

pwagland (472537) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801551)

Q: What Is Mac On Linux?

A: Mac-on-Linux lets you run MacOS under Linux/ppc. MOL runs natively on the processor, i.e. it is very fast. Unlike most mac emulators, MOL can run MacOS 8.6 and later WITHOUT A ROM IMAGE.

I'm guessing that the requirement to have a ROM image available was lifted in MacOS 8.6. What you say used to be true, but I do not think that it is true anymore....

Re:From the MOL FAQ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4801554)

You _ARE_ a clueless troll arn't you.

MacOS comes with a boot rom, and has for a long time now. Go to the MOL website and read it before continuing to spread false information.

(I'd give you a link, but I'm a bastard, go use google.)

Re:From the MOL FAQ (1)

Pius II. (525191) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801657)

Bzzt, wrong. Since the "New world" architecture has been introduced (some years ago), Mac OS comes with an "HD rom". 16MB ROMs had simply gotten too expensive, I think. Nowadays, the classic Mac OSs simply have a "Mac OS ROM" file in the System Folder, Mac OS X doesn't even have that. Of course, to run System 9 under MOL, you'd have to have the ROM.
Another thing to ponder is that the underlying OS of OS X runs on x86, but I certainly have no Apple ROM in my Athlon :-)

I'd guess the main difference between those boards and the current PowerMacs' boards is the northbridge and the firmware.

Re:From the MOL FAQ (1)

ArhcAngel (247594) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801950)

This brings up a question often posed about software "licensing"? If I have paid for the software/hardware/firmware/jelloware... isn't it now up to me what I do with it? As long as I am not using it on multiple machines simultaneously why should I be prohibited from using it on the hardware/emulator of my choice? From Apple's POV it's about selling hardware. You have 3 choices, avoid non-Apple hardware, use non-Apple hardware knowing you are violating the EULA, or challenge the EULA in court.

Re:From the MOL FAQ (2)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 11 years ago | (#4802572)

but it is also technically illegal!
ObCorrection: No, not illegal, because MacOS is available in retail stores. You can buy MacOS without agreeing to anything. Thus, there is no EULA.

Ok, so what? (1, Flamebait)

Kenja (541830) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800847)

So what advantage does this board have over, say, a dual Athlon MB? Why go through the trouble to use an older PPC based system if you're just going to end up running Linux on it? If this could run OS X as well that would be one thing. But everyone knows how strict Apple is when it comes to that.

So I guess I just dont get it. Why is this worth the effort.

Re:Ok, so what? (1)

Tsk (2863) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800976)

You don't ahve to deal with rootkits. Remeber the craking contest done by linuxPPC inc. It took over 3 mlonth to a long time linux dev, to xrite the correct shell code to break in a famous proftpd hole. SO for building a firewall it's worth it .
see http://slashdot.org/articles/99/08/04/205226.shtml [slashdot.org]
for the initial contest anouncment. can't find the end of it thought, but didn't look very either.

NetBSD (1)

Aknaton (528294) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800855)

I'll consider one if NetBSD runs on it.

That's the same thing I told... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4800902)

a salesman when I was looking for a new wristwatch. Luckily there were plenty of models that could boot NetBSD.

Re:NetBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4800924)

Sure, but wouldn't a cluster of Dreamcasts be a better price/performance tradeoff?

FreeBSD? (3, Interesting)

nsayer (86181) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800871)

FreeBSD 5.0 will have a PPC port. I wonder if it will run on this hardware? I imagine the only requirement is an OpenFirmware BIOS for booting.

Re:FreeBSD? (1)

Tsk (2863) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800895)

plus you need dreivers to be rewritten to the kernel API of BSD.

The goog news about the ppc port of FreeBSD is that it'll be simpler to integrate to darwin and thus os X.

Re:FreeBSD? (3, Insightful)

nsayer (86181) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800947)

The only drivers that would need work would be for on-board devices. Presumably it has PCI slots, and any PCI devices supported on FreeBSD x86 should work just fine on any other platform (modulo bugs). So what sort of on-board devices do these things have? Anything more exotic than ATA, USB or Firewire controllers (which are likely to be well supported)?

Nothing new here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4800874)

This is excatly the same board that Eyetech is selling as their AmigaOne... So, why has this suddenly jumped under Apple category?

Distros and Costs? (4, Insightful)

Komarosu (538875) | more than 11 years ago | (#4800916)

Interesting here that YDL are trying to "pimp" it as there platform, but with other PPC linux distros making there way along then it does give you a nice choice for a cheap linux desktop solution.

Yes it might be cheaper to buy x86, but what about these people who want to experiment on new platforms? Also the reason why x86 is cheaper is due to mass demand, i imagin that if they get a lot of sales of these PPC mobos then the prices will drop

I personally is very interested in getting one of these just to experiance PPC, strange as it may sound but ive never really touched a PPC based platform in my life! (dont ask me how to modify BIOS settings or whatever on a Mac :))

Re:Distros and Costs? (3, Informative)

green pizza (159161) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801376)

(dont ask me how to modify BIOS settings or whatever on a Mac :))

OpenFirmware, baby! Hope you brushed up on FORTH! :)

Hit google, lots of stuff on OF out there, it's sort of a standard.

Re:Distros and Costs? (2, Informative)

mkldev (219128) | more than 11 years ago | (#4802628)

To be pedantic, most of the options that are interesting can be changed with simple shell-like syntax. You only need to know forth if you want to rewrite parts of the "BIOS", for example if you find a bug in the ATA driver in the firmware and want to change it to "think differently".

Most of the settings that can be changed in a PC BIOS do not need to be changed on a Mac, due to fundamental differences in the interrupt and memory architectures (e.g. there's no such thing as I/O space, and there are enough interrupt lines that IRQ sharring is a non-issue (as in minimum 64, often more).

The only thing I'm aware of that you can set in BIOS that you might want to change on OF but can't is the clock. Oh well.

The "new Amiga" ;) (5, Informative)

Seehund (86897) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801070)

It's not mentioned in the story, but this board is the Teron CX [mai.com], which is also distributed under the licensed trademark "AmigaOne G3-SE" [eyetech.co.uk].

There's also a model with the CPU on an exchangeable module, called Teron PX [mai.com] (or "AmigaOne XE" when it's marketed to AmigaOS users). Hopefully we'll see Terrasoft and others selling Teron PX as well, which offers G4 and 750FX (a newer, faster G3 design) CPUs.

Due to a seriously fscked up compulsory licensing policy [8bit.co.uk] for AmigaOS, that OS will however not be sold separate from licensed hardware and be allowed to be installed on Teron boards from vendors who are not licensed by Amiga, Inc., like Terrasoft.

P.S. Why is this story under "Apple"? MOL runs fine on these, but come on!

Re:The "new Amiga" ;) (2)

Seehund (86897) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801108)

[AmigaOS] will however not be sold separate from licensed hardware and be allowed to be installed on Teron boards from vendors who are not licensed

Hm, just to make it clear, that's "and NOT be allowed to be installed on ...".

Doom3? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4801077)

The real question that should be asked here is, "Can it run Doom3?" If so, I might consider purchasing it. Or maybe a beowulf cluster....

Use it as a DMZ box. (5, Insightful)

Mr_Icon (124425) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801191)

Since it's a PPC, skr1pt k1dd1ez will have a whole lotta trouble trying to crack it with cut-and-paste x86 rootkits. Of course, it will not stop a knowledgeble attacker and is not at all a substitute for applying errata in a timely fashion, but it's still a significant plus in my book. And if you use YDL, it will be nearly identical in every feature to your x86 Red Hat Linux boxen.

I can totally see it running as a firewall/external webserver/DNS server box. Of course, granted that TerraSoft mobos aren't POS. Only time and wide use will tell.

Re:Use it as a DMZ box. (2)

Seehund (86897) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801404)

I can totally see it running as a firewall/external webserver/DNS server box.

Yup. And check out another product based on Mai's Articia northbridge, the "Micro Server-S" [mai.com]. Almost the same mobo as this Teron, but on a PCI card! I haven't seen any pricing for this, but it's also sold by Inguard [inguard.com] (who also sell Terons, called Phoenix [inguard.com] and Dragon [inguard.com].

Why You Really Do Want a Beowulf Cluster of These (2)

MichaelCrawford (610140) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801223)

Power consumption. PowerPC's use very little power compared to any x86 processor, and generate very little heat.

Thinking of building a beowulf cluster in your home?

Think again. You may need special power wiring and air conditioning to handle a rack with any significant number of CPUs in it.

But one should be able to build a PowerPC beowulf cluster that is powered by household AC and still get a significant number of CPUs on the rack, and not have to add air conditioning to the room.

Geeky (1)

leoboiko (462141) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801256)

As both our companies (TSS + Mai) are strong proponents of the Linux community, we are eager to provide specs and support in order to gain reciprocal support of the Linux community and quickly advance support for as many cards as is possible.
(...)
We will encourage the Linux do-it-yourself tradition by empowering individuals to seek and discover solutions to the best of their ability before we assist them directly.

I like this!
With the x86 hegemony and the growth of "you-don't-need-to-know-how-this-thing-works" hardware, I find this one refreshing. If someone made something like this using MIPS architeture, I'd buy it for sure.

MOL already runs (1)

amigabill (146897) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801553)

This board is also being sold by Eyetech (www.eyetech.co.uk) as the AmigaOne SE, which has already been shown running Mac On Linux via SUSE I believe. Also keep an eye out for the Teron PX board, which will have a socket to swap CPU modules, which I believe can use Mac CPU modules.

why would you want to? (2, Insightful)

splateagle (557203) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801564)

Can anyone explain the fascination with running OS X on non-Apple hardware? the beauty of OS X (imho) is that it finally offers elegantly designed and powerful software for elegantly designed and powerful hardware, why the urge to stick it in some nasty biege box?

Re:why would you want to? (3, Insightful)

nsayer (86181) | more than 11 years ago | (#4802568)

why the urge to stick it in some nasty beige box?

Because it would cost less.

Of course, that presumes your time and hacking effort is free, but for most /.ers, I suspect it is.

The board that wouldn't die (2)

heroine (1220) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801792)

Mentor Arc originally developed their power PC board as a reference board for embedded systems dedicated to a particular purpose. You see, most embedded systems don't use general purpose motherboards but build their own custom board around a reference, hence the added value. The Mentor Arc board was so unreliable that it's no surprise that they finally opened up to the idea of general purpose computing in the end. As wonderful as custom boards are, sometimes you need to let the customer figure out what to do with it so you can work out the kinks.

AGP Support??? (1)

deKernel (65640) | more than 11 years ago | (#4801970)

The one question that I had about the specs is the AGP sharing with the PCI slot.
From what I remember, the AGP bus connects directly to the chipset along with the north & south bridges. What exactly are they doing when they say 'sharing'?

Solution? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4802024)

It's a bit unfortunate that Slashdot would reuse a marketing term like "solution" to refer to a product. Computers aren't a solution, they're the beginning of all your problems!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...