ARM processor engine

All flavors welcome.
Forum rules
Be kind.
Post Reply
User avatar
richmond62
Posts: 2622
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 11:03 am
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

ARM processor engine

Post by richmond62 »

This might, eventually, prove a show stopper.
https://richmondmathewson.owlstown.net/
User avatar
OpenXTalkPaul
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:19 pm
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by OpenXTalkPaul »

richmond62 wrote: Tue Oct 19, 2021 4:38 pm This might, eventually, prove a show stopper.
I assume you mean Apple Silicon?
Unless someone can build a current community engine to run on natively for that line, it will still run on those CPUs through Rosetta 2 instruction set translation. The X86_64bit engine is still useful on Apple Silicon run as long as Apple supports Rosetta 2. I'd give it one more major macOS version.

Running though instruction set translation is a less than optimal way to run on Apple Silicon, but as I understand it, performance of most apps is comparable, and sometimes significantly better than, running natively on a X86_64 CPU.

I did see the new M1 Pros Apple announcements yesterday. They seem amazing, and this is just the beginning!
But my reality is that family just bought a couple of new computers when the pandemic hit (my youngest needed a better rig for "zoom" school), so It will likely be some time before I get my hands on a Mac with Apple Silicon.
FourthWorld
Posts: 280
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:37 pm
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by FourthWorld »

Historically Apple handles CPU architecture changes by supporting fat binaries for about 24 months or so.
User avatar
OpenXTalkPaul
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:19 pm
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by OpenXTalkPaul »

FourthWorld wrote: Wed Oct 20, 2021 1:31 am Historically Apple handles CPU architecture changes by supporting fat binaries for about 24 months or so.
How do you figure 24 Months? What are you basing that on? Apple switched to Intel with 10.4.1 (Dev Kit, which pretty much immediately kicked off "Hackintoshing") and supported PowerPC software at the OS level until until 10.6.8

Culled from Wikipedia:
June 6, 2005: Apple released a Developer Transition System, a PC running an Intel build of Mac OS X 10.4.1
July 25, 2011: Final release of Mac OS Snow Leopard 10.6.8 v1.1 (Build 10K549)
June 11, 2012: Apple releases iTunes 10.6.3, their last application with support for PowerPC processors.
That's 7.5 years after the switch!
(Not to mention some things, like community builds of Safari's web engine WebKit, TenFourFox, and patches for things like heartbleed kept PPC viable for even longer.)

That's also about 20 years from the switch to PowerPC CPUs. Obviously you weren't going to have much luck running 10.5.8 or 10.4.11 on a PowerMac 601, but software wise you could likely still run the same apps via "Classic" mode.
I ran the late 2007 released MacOSX 10.4.11 on my early 1997 PowerMac 9600 quite well (with G4 upgrade, ATI 9000 GPU, and XPostFacto open firmware patch). Over ten years is a pretty good run for computer hardware!

I believe similarly long, if not longer support for M68K existed in MacOS after the switch to PowerPC. Although some 1980s Mac apps could be a pain to run on macOS 9.2.2, or not run at all, many ran perfectly fine because Apple still included 68K emulation built into the OS.

Apple just (FINALLY) release new Intel XEON based high-end MacPro towers and iMacPros last year, I would expect they're going to solidly support those customers for at least about 5 years.
There's a fairly large community of people who've been maxing out and hacking newer XEONs and newer GPUs upgrades into MacPro Towers released in 2009! Some are even running the latest macOS betas on this rigs (thanks to OpenCore).

Unfortunately, I think those types of things likely won't be happening with Apple products anymore, given the trend of forced obsolescence and the landfill-filling disposable tech attitudes of the general public these days.
FourthWorld
Posts: 280
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:37 pm
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by FourthWorld »

OpenXTalkPaul wrote: Wed Oct 20, 2021 9:31 pm
FourthWorld wrote: Wed Oct 20, 2021 1:31 am Historically Apple handles CPU architecture changes by supporting fat binaries for about 24 months or so.
How do you figure 24 Months? What are you basing that on?
Having been an Apple customer since the '80s.

Might be longer, won't be shorter.

Regardless, it will need to be addressed. Apple's relationship with backwards compatibility is, shall we say, "dynamic" (I'm trying to avoid using "unpredictably cavalier").
User avatar
OpenXTalkPaul
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:19 pm
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by OpenXTalkPaul »

FourthWorld wrote: Fri Oct 22, 2021 6:03 pm
OpenXTalkPaul wrote: Wed Oct 20, 2021 9:31 pm
FourthWorld wrote: Wed Oct 20, 2021 1:31 am Historically Apple handles CPU architecture changes by supporting fat binaries for about 24 months or so.
How do you figure 24 Months? What are you basing that on?
Having been an Apple customer since the '80s.

Might be longer, won't be shorter.

Regardless, it will need to be addressed. Apple's relationship with backwards compatibility is, shall we say, "dynamic" (I'm trying to avoid using "unpredictably cavalier").
I've been an Apple customer in one way or another since about 1987 (well my dad, since I was still in high school), and have worked for and with their business customers (the entire Printing Industry is still an Apple stronghold) since the early 90s as well... I have to agree, they certainly are not that same company any more, I guess they're not even a computer company anymore since they dropped the "Computer" part in their name. These days I wouldn't put it past that company to completely drop support as soon as they possibly could.

Moreover, it's not anywhere near as fun for me to be a computer/mac enthusiast as it was back then, Raspberry Pi, single-board computers and project boards are probably the coolest things to happen in computing this century in my opinion.

As for addressing building the community engines for Apple Silicon architecture, I don't have the hardware to test such a build (it should be possible to compile Mac ARM64 on Mac X86_64, but wouldn't be able to legitimately test it)... Like I said, it will likely be at least a year or more before I do (maybe by then Apple will some have more affordable M1 Pro or M2s, or whatever MacMINIs or MacBookAir available).

So unless I use some cloud computer to build (as in the link I posted) or someone else with an Apple Silicon Mac can compile the engine for that architecture, then native community Mac-ARM64 is not going to happen anytime soon.
Anyone who needs xTalk native on Apple Silicon that badly should probably cough up some cash for an LC Ltd. subscription.
User avatar
richmond62
Posts: 2622
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 11:03 am
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by richmond62 »

A proof of this sort of thing is that I am able to run RevMedia 4 on a current Linux distro (Xubuntu 64-bit, 21,10)
as well as RevMedia 4 for Windows on the same machine under WINE. While the newest Macintosh machine I can
run RevMdiea 4 on is a 2006 32-bit iMac running macOS 10.6.8.

One of the main reasons I hang onto that oldish iMac (well, OK, other kinky reasons) is that I own a copy of Bryce 7
which does not run on my 2006 64-bit macOS 10.7.5 machine and I still want to use it.
https://richmondmathewson.owlstown.net/
User avatar
OpenXTalkPaul
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:19 pm
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by OpenXTalkPaul »

richmond62 wrote: Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:02 pm the newest Macintosh machine I can run RevMdiea 4 on is a 2006 32-bit iMac running macOS 10.6.8.
I don't think it's bit-ness preventing it from running, I run 32 bit apps and plug-ins on macOS 10.14.6 all the time! It probably uses some Apple frameworks that are no longer available, such as Carbon (which is what has basically killed SuperCard).
User avatar
richmond62
Posts: 2622
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 11:03 am
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by richmond62 »

Nothing special, just that from macOS 10.15 "upwards" (subjective directional motion)
32 bit apps don't run.

Alos, there is an invisible line between 10.9 and below which excludes a lot of stuff, which I run on my 32-bit 10.6.8 machine
or my 64-bit 10.7.5 machine.
https://richmondmathewson.owlstown.net/
User avatar
OpenXTalkPaul
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:19 pm
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by OpenXTalkPaul »

richmond62 wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 6:19 am Nothing special, just that from macOS 10.15 "upwards" (subjective directional motion)
32 bit apps don't run.
Right, that's why I'm still running 10.14.6
richmond62 wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 6:19 am Alos, there is an invisible line between 10.9 and below which excludes a lot of stuff, which I run on my 32-bit 10.6.8 machine
or my 64-bit 10.7.5 machine.
Every version has excluded at least some stuff. Some more than others. I remember 10.6.x being a bit of a problem because that iteration dropped AppleTalk from the OS, and the company I worked for at the time was still using several Postscript RIP / Print servers that ran on AppleTalk. Ironically the Windows Servers still supported AppleTalk service (as does Linux with NetAtalk), we just set up shared print spoolers on other machines to get around it.
User avatar
richmond62
Posts: 2622
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 11:03 am
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by richmond62 »

I do somehow feel that Apple "lost a lot of the plot" when they went from being a company who made computers
with an in-house operating system to a company that made fancy-pants electronic toys for rich posers.

The reason I currently use a 2018 Mac Mini as my 'main man' is that my younger son, in a fit
of marvellous generosity bought me one as a Christmas present when he was working in Los Angeles.

If it "goes west" at some point I shall just "drop down" to Xubuntu: a system which, after 15 years of constant use, I feel
completely at home and can run an almost any old piece of crap I have lying around.

And using the phrase "drop down" does the Canonical people a great disservice.

My father, in a slight error of judgement, having asked me to buy him a semi-decent ASUS laptop about 4 years ago
and set it up with Xubuntu (which he had used on another laptop for 13 years before that), omitted to take it
with him when he died, so it ended up with me: and a damn fine system it is too both in respect of its functionality
and responsive, and that it makes me think of Dad every day.

When I went, here in Bulgaria to buy the laptop I had to threaten the staff in the computer shop so they would
not force me to buy a laptop with Windows on it: at a 100 Euro difference . . .

Now: Xubuntu has chuntered along on that laptop for 4 years with "never a backward glance", and can run DOS
programs (for my kinkier moments) and every blasted version of MetaCard and Runtime Revolution ever made
except for the Macintosh versions.
https://richmondmathewson.owlstown.net/
User avatar
OpenXTalkPaul
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:19 pm
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by OpenXTalkPaul »

I've become a fan of running Linux in recent years, and less and less a fan of proprietary closed systems.

Linux is great for keeping older hardware useful.

I just wish there was, or that I could find, a Linux Desktop Environment and General Apps bundle (mail, web, text editor, basic image viewer/editor, etc.) that was truly as integrated and intuitive as I think macOS is, with things like "clippings" and drag and drop between apps and the like. Not just the macOS "Look", which is fairly easy to achieve, but the more import to me "Feel" part.

This morning I tried MX Linux briefly and about to give Manjaro a go, both of these appeared in top-five of various review lists on the web.
User avatar
richmond62
Posts: 2622
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 11:03 am
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by richmond62 »

Um: I fell foul of MX Linux a couple of years ago: I think this is because
it is essentially a Greek-only distro; so too few people helping out there.

What I like about Xubuntu is that it has ALL the "kick" of Ubuntu behind it with the XFCE
desktop stuff, which I much prefer to the Ubuntu "thang".
https://richmondmathewson.owlstown.net/
User avatar
OpenXTalkPaul
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:19 pm
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by OpenXTalkPaul »

richmond62 wrote: Tue Oct 26, 2021 5:12 pm Um: I fell foul of MX Linux a couple of years ago: I think this is because
it is essentially a Greek-only distro; so too few people helping out there.

What I like about Xubuntu is that it has ALL the "kick" of Ubuntu behind it with the XFCE
desktop stuff, which I much prefer to the Ubuntu "thang".
The last time I went through this processes of searching for a daily driver Linux distro, I wound up with Xubuntu as well.
But it's been a while since then so I'm giving a few others a spin before I move on to actually installing LCC / OXT on it.

Manjaro was kinda of "meh" :( It didn't auto setup my wifi card ( it's a Broadcom not some obscure chipset, so not sure why), I couldn't find the WLAN configurator, and then when I did there was no wifi network scanning for easy configuration, I have multiple routers in different areas of my house (one for the garage, one to get a good signal in my backyard, etc.), with different names, irritating that I have to manually type that info.

I remember trying ElementaryOS and thinking that was pretty nice and Mac-ish, Linux Mint was pretty good too.
User avatar
richmond62
Posts: 2622
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 11:03 am
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by richmond62 »

I had a "dirty" thought today and copied the 'Runtime' folder out of a commercial version of LiveCode
and pasted it into LC 9.6.3 Community and attempted to build a Macintosh standalone:
-
SShot 2021-11-04 at 10.21.47.png
SShot 2021-11-04 at 10.21.47.png (30.02 KiB) Viewed 5501 times
-
So, I did what that notice told me to do, and "Lo And Behold" a standalone was generated,

BUT it crashed . . . Blast!

I am sure that if one is clever (which, obviously, I am not), that warning notice may contain sufficient hints
to do 'something' so a commercial engine can be used to generate a standalone from the erstwhile community
version . . . and then, as my dirty mind was thinking, one might be able to leverage a Mac ARM engine when and if
one appears . . .
https://richmondmathewson.owlstown.net/
User avatar
OpenXTalkPaul
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:19 pm
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by OpenXTalkPaul »

richmond62 wrote: Thu Nov 04, 2021 8:26 am I had a "dirty" thought today and copied the 'Runtime' folder out of a commercial version of LiveCode
and pasted it into LC 9.6.3 Community and attempted to build a Macintosh standalone:
-
SShot 2021-11-04 at 10.21.47.png
-
So, I did what that notice told me to do, and "Lo And Behold" a standalone was generated,

BUT it crashed . . . Blast!

I am sure that if one is clever (which, obviously, I am not), that warning notice may contain sufficient hints
to do 'something' so a commercial engine can be used to generate a standalone from the erstwhile community
version . . . and then, as my dirty mind was thinking, one might be able to leverage a Mac ARM engine when and if
one appears . . .
Well I can't condone mixing Commercial software with the GPL3 community software, nor could I even if I wanted to. I only have stale LiveCode Indy build that I haven't launched in a a long time because I find it annoying to have to set my computer's System Clock back to when I installed it! ;)
However, IF it was me trying to do what you were trying, I would probably also be looking at bringing along the other bits of Standalone Builder (the IDE stacks that starts with revSB..., revsavess...standalone) and, perhaps more importantly when it comes to AppleSilicon binaries, editing the default info.plist, making sure that it's set for the correct CPU architecture, and you might have to resign the app when it's done on newer macOS versions. ;) I can't think of why that wouldn't work beyond some sort of failed licensing check.
User avatar
richmond62
Posts: 2622
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 11:03 am
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by richmond62 »

I can't condone mixing Commercial software with the GPL3 community software
Well, I cannot condone what some people do together in their bedrooms, but they are going to
do it anyway, and it really isn't my business.

Me, a cat, 2 camels and a bunch of parsley. But I digress. 8-)

I was NOT promoting this as a "way ahead", hence my prefacing the whole thing with "my dirty mind".

AND I certainly would not consider hiving off Mac ARM standalones from a pinched engine for anything beyond
my own entertainment confined to the machine where I made them.

HOWEVER, were it to work, it might be possible to be "very nice indeed" to LiveCode centre and ask
them if we could 'have' a version of a Mac ARM engine 'for the use of'.
https://richmondmathewson.owlstown.net/
ernie
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2021 7:24 pm
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by ernie »

OpenXTalkPaul wrote: Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:06 pm I've become a fan of running Linux in recent years, and less and less a fan of proprietary closed systems.

Linux is great for keeping older hardware useful.

I just wish there was, or that I could find, a Linux Desktop Environment and General Apps bundle (mail, web, text editor, basic image viewer/editor, etc.) that was truly as integrated and intuitive as I think macOS is, with things like "clippings" and drag and drop between apps and the like. Not just the macOS "Look", which is fairly easy to achieve, but the more import to me "Feel" part.

This morning I tried MX Linux briefly and about to give Manjaro a go, both of these appeared in top-five of various review lists on the web.
I run Elementary OS which is Ubuntu under the hood, with a clean Mac inspired desktop. It's pitched at the education market like Hypercard was. Well worth a try if you have not done so already.
User avatar
OpenXTalkPaul
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:19 pm
Contact:

Re: ARM processor engine

Post by OpenXTalkPaul »

ernie wrote: Thu Nov 11, 2021 7:28 pm
OpenXTalkPaul wrote: Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:06 pm I've become a fan of running Linux in recent years, and less and less a fan of proprietary closed systems.

Linux is great for keeping older hardware useful.

I just wish there was, or that I could find, a Linux Desktop Environment and General Apps bundle (mail, web, text editor, basic image viewer/editor, etc.) that was truly as integrated and intuitive as I think macOS is, with things like "clippings" and drag and drop between apps and the like. Not just the macOS "Look", which is fairly easy to achieve, but the more import to me "Feel" part.

This morning I tried MX Linux briefly and about to give Manjaro a go, both of these appeared in top-five of various review lists on the web.
I run Elementary OS which is Ubuntu under the hood, with a clean Mac inspired desktop. It's pitched at the education market like Hypercard was. Well worth a try if you have not done so already.
Yup, I have tried it, it is nice, and very Mac-esque GUI wise, but as you said it's still Ubuntu under the hood.
There was something I didn't like about it but can't remember exactly what it was, it was a year or more ago when I last gave it a spin. Their package manager maybe?

There IS an OS Dev project currently that is MUCH more than Mac-looking on the surface, it's Mac-like under the hood too!
It's built on FreeBSD (UNIX) and GNUStep (NeXTStep/Cocoa), incorporates elements of Linux via compatibility layer I believe. Supports linux .appimage (which was invented by the same person). If they would add something like Darwinian they might even be able to get it to run actual macOS apps, that would be cool!
It's called helloSystem:
https://news.itsfoss.com/hellosystem-to ... t-release/
https://github.com/helloSystem/hello
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3z9QnMTLm8

Unfortunately there's no FreeBSD native build of OXT (at least not yet).
The Linux build should run in an AppImage on that OS but I haven't had time to try that out yet.

Edit: I'm trying it out now.
Edit: Boots to desktop on my Dell e7470 laptop, but the monitor resolution is not correct and top of screen with the global system menu is cut off, to be fair it is currently being actively developed and hasn't reached a 1.0 yet.

I do like this guy's "Suck Less" policy :)
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests