Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 48

Thread: Work Still Underway To Run OS X Binaries On Linux

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,310

    Default Work Still Underway To Run OS X Binaries On Linux

    Phoronix: Work Still Underway To Run OS X Binaries On Linux

    The Darling Project is still moving forward with its goal of being able to run Mac OS X binaries under Linux...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQwOTk

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,001

    Default Uninteresting

    Seems rather uninteresting.

    Any OS X software of importance already exists for Windows too, so you can use Wine for that.
    OS X have small market share, so not many applications.
    Most OS X applications seem to be proprietary and commercial too, so pretty boring.
    Most have good Linux alternatives anyways.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    680

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Any OS X software of importance already exists for Windows too, so you can use Wine for that.
    Not true, there is plenty of game and applications only available on Mac. There is also historical applications that won't run on current Mac's that might be interest in having running on a modern OS. And you might already own a license for the Mac copy but not for the Windows copy. It's help fully for users transitioning from Mac to Linux where Wine is not.
    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    OS X have small market share, so not many applications.
    Even more true for Linux.
    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Most OS X applications seem to be proprietary and commercial too, so pretty boring.
    Most have good Linux alternatives anyways.
    Same could be sad for Windows/Wine.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    25

    Default You Need To Revisit OS X

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Seems rather uninteresting.

    Any OS X software of importance already exists for Windows too, so you can use Wine for that.
    OS X have small market share, so not many applications.
    Most OS X applications seem to be proprietary and commercial too, so pretty boring.
    Most have good Linux alternatives anyways.
    The idea of OS X being a little brother to Windows isn't really true anymore. They still have a small market share, but there are now a lot of apps that are made just for putting in the Apple App Store on OS X. BSD-licensed and Apache-licensed software is a bit more prevalent on OS X than you might think and the Linux alternatives exist, but they aren't as well designed as the OS X versions.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    118

    Default

    This would be useful for Linux users who require access to OS X applications for compatibility with Mac users.

    Could be helpful for porting if they come up with something similar to winelib.

    I'm surprised nobody has done something similar for OS/2. There are porting libs: http://os2linux.sourceforge.net

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,202

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Seems rather uninteresting.

    Any OS X software of importance already exists for Windows too, so you can use Wine for that.
    OS X have small market share, so not many applications.
    Most OS X applications seem to be proprietary and commercial too, so pretty boring.
    Most have good Linux alternatives anyways.
    No, y'know what's boring? Every time something non-open source is coming to linux, you're there to bitch about it. You have still yet to give a GOOD reason why linux and everything associated with it must remain open source. The more abstracted the software is, the less it matters if its open source. In other words, anything that is kernel level SHOULD remain FOSS, whereas anything that is strictly userland (with no ability to modify the OS) can be w/e the hell the devs want it to be. In this case, programs like Wine, Darling, and the software they run are almost the highest level as you can possibly get, since they abstract things that have already been abstracted (such as audio).

    Basically, my point is there's no reason to want to exile userland proprietary software, as it helps more than hurts.

    Aside from the perfectly reasonable comments AJenbo said, another thing to consider is Mac and Linux are both POSIX and have surprisingly a lot in common. It should take considerably less effort and less performance drawbacks to run a Mac program than a Windows program. Since, as you said, most Mac programs are also on Windows, that means there could be hundreds, maybe even thousands of programs that won't run in Wine but will run in Darling. In other words, the Mac version of Photoshop is much more likely to work in Darling than it would in Wine.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    715

    Default

    Linux FTW

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    184

    Default

    So instead porting OSX apps we will have to deal with sucky emulators great. When will people realize that is impossible to match features of moving target
    If this is toy project im okay with this everybody should be allowed to waste time

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Seems rather uninteresting.
    Seems rather interesting.

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Any OS X software of importance already exists for Windows too, so you can use Wine for that.
    It has been already said: Mac OS is Unix. It will most likely work much better than wine as all the low level stuff can probably run with a thin compatibility layer like the linux compatibility layer freebsd has. Also, no directx on Mac OS. Some of the 3d games may have been "ported" using wine, but some may have also been ported to native OpenGL. Also much better than wine.

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    OS X have small market share, so not many applications.
    Microsoft Office, Adobe Creativity Suite like Photoshop, Indesign, ..., professional Video and Audio editors, not too many, but still some AAA games, maybe Xcode (maybe not, some seem to love it, some seem to hate it)...

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Most OS X applications seem to be proprietary and commercial too, so pretty boring.
    Yes. But like Stallman said to steam: It is still better to use steam on linux than to use it on windows, and if it is only because it helps linux adoption and thus driver development.

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Most have good Linux alternatives anyways.
    Yes, but if you are e.g. an artist who has spend the last decade using Photoshop and this is the only program keeping you from using linux, then no.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Seems rather uninteresting.

    Any OS X software of importance already exists for Windows too, so you can use Wine for that.
    OS X have small market share, so not many applications.
    Most OS X applications seem to be proprietary and commercial too, so pretty boring.
    Most have good Linux alternatives anyways.
    It still helps for testing when you want to write software that runs on OSX natively, while you use Linux.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ramiliez View Post
    So instead porting OSX apps we will have to deal with sucky emulators great. When will people realize that is impossible to match features of moving target
    If this is toy project im okay with this everybody should be allowed to waste time
    You can not port what you don't have the source for. With an emulation layer, at least you can run it regardless dev's will to port it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •