PDA

View Full Version : Please Port to Mac OS X



t_raszka
06-14-2004, 08:09 AM
Please. We are in dire need for this wonderful flight sim.

OS X is the perfect platform, open GL and you would have absoutley no competition in this market! Warbirds? X-Plane? yeah right.


check this out!

http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20010711/wood_01.htm


Please consider this.

Thank you.

t_raszka
06-14-2004, 08:09 AM
Please. We are in dire need for this wonderful flight sim.

OS X is the perfect platform, open GL and you would have absoutley no competition in this market! Warbirds? X-Plane? yeah right.


check this out!

http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20010711/wood_01.htm


Please consider this.

Thank you.

ASM 1
06-14-2004, 08:37 AM
or you could buy Virtual PC and play it that way....

S!

Andrew

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v299/asm016/WW2%20Stuff/Sig_Pic.jpg

t_raszka
06-14-2004, 09:07 AM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VPC 7 for the G5 panthers is not out yet, and im not so sure it handles running games very well. especially high end sims.

thanks for the thought tho.

ASM 1
06-14-2004, 09:29 AM
dunno if you are going to have much choice (or buy a PC! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) since Oleg has stated it won't be ported to other OS'es http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif . Not "Mac bashing" here -I've got a G3 600 and run Panther - very nice, very nice indeed!

S!

Andrew

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v299/asm016/WW2%20Stuff/Sig_Pic.jpg

t_raszka
06-14-2004, 01:13 PM
ok. thanks alot for your friendly post.

i have an 800mhz AMD Athlon 1 gig pc100 ram gf 5200fx i fear it will not be enough to run IL2FB/AEP even tho IL2 ran fine

However in feb i just brought a brand new G5 dual 2 with panther and it is AWESOME! so i wont be able to afford or upgrade my pc for some time. LOL

oh well.

ASM 1
06-14-2004, 02:16 PM
Might wwanna check ebay and the like for cheap faster Athlons for your board - you've got more ram than me and a better gfx cardhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif (I run FB with onboard gfx LOL! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) Granted I have a P4 1.8 but you may be able to pick up a faster processor on the cheap...

Damn! your G5 sounds awesome http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/784.gif

S!

Andrew

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v299/asm016/WW2%20Stuff/Sig_Pic.jpg

JFW
06-15-2004, 12:32 PM
Why would it be a good idea to port a game from a niche genre to a niche platform? You'd have to recode APIs calls from scratch while using different optimizations, compilers, while putting up with a different set of bugs, all the while planning for seperate updates and patches. Given most serious Mac Gamers do so on a PC and given many Mac users lack of inclination to game, you'd spend a lot of money porting it while selling perhaps a couple ten-thousand copies.

p1ngu666
06-15-2004, 12:57 PM
i use the G5 i think at work, its 4 or 5 and the plasticy one with case before the new fancy metal one.
there is one of those there buts its just a file server http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
the OS im using is cack tbh, OS X is ment tobe much better tho

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg
<123_GWood_JG123> NO SPAM!

HellToupee
06-15-2004, 09:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JFW:
Why would it be a good idea to port a game from a niche genre to a niche platform? You'd have to recode APIs calls from scratch while using different optimizations, compilers, while putting up with a different set of bugs, all the while planning for seperate updates and patches. Given most serious Mac Gamers do so on a PC and given many Mac users lack of inclination to game, you'd spend a lot of money porting it while selling perhaps a couple ten-thousand copies.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

unless you use multiplatform apis http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. ID epic etc seem to have no trouble maintaining linux and mac versions of their games.

http://lamppost.mine.nu/ahclan/files/sigs/spitwhiners1.jpg

VulgarOne
06-15-2004, 09:46 PM
Mac OS X is a version of FreeBSD originally developed by Berkley university based off of the Unix/Linux platform (kernel).

Both FreeBSD Unix/Linux is a much better OS for graphics, networking and multiple tasks, the Mac has been the graphics king for many years. They are all and have been for some time (years in some cases) 64 bit capable.

Many more people in the world are aware of Linux and use Linux than what Americans are aware of, simply because M$ does not want anyone to know that there is a choice other than Windoze.

As a gaming platform FreeBSD/Unix/Linux is far superior. Try out some of the games that are ported for these OSâ's. Americas Army and Castle Wolfenstien are a couple that are free, and many others you can purchase. I get 20+ more FPS running Linux playing the same game on the same system. Targetware a CFS still in beta has a Mac release and will be including Linux. Since other game developers are able to produce releases for Windoze, Mac and Linux. It is obviously something else that is stopping Oleg from producing a version ported for other OSâ's.

To say that there is not enough customers is nonsense. Linux use all over the world is much larger than in the US, and is currently climbing rapidly in the US. Linux/FreeBSD can be loaded and will run on the same hardrive as Windoze. I multi boot all my computers, M$ does not want you to know it can be done. Cheap or for free versions can be simply installed by adjusting any current Windoze partitions, so you do not have to purchase another hard drive. Most of the newer releases of Linux do so easily through a GUI installation. If you do not want to mess with re-sizing the Windoze partition then simply purchase a new hardrive so that you can switch from one OS to the other. I know every major game addict would gladly part with the cost of a Linux flavor ( $0-$90) depending on what level of capability you want or how experienced you are to gain 20 fps. Much cheaper than purchasing a new graphics card, still cheaper even if you purchase a second HD.

For those of you with a MAC you may be able to install Windoze or run a second HD, so you can still play the Windoze only games on your system ( I have not done so my self with the newer Macâ's but is should be possible). If you do install Windoze on your MAC first look into multi booting with FreeBSD to ensure you know all the procedures. One detriment to FreeBSD is that it cannot be loaded in a extended partition like Linux/Unix and some Windoze versions, not a big problem in most cases as most people do not need more than 4 primary partitions anyways. I would suggest installing Windoze first then subsequent installs of Windoze ( I have multiple installs for gaming and business on the same HD with Linux and Windoze) and or Linux/Unix/FreeBSD next. Windoze booting procedure is rather fragile (intentionally) in comparison to Linux/Unix/FreeBSD and does not allow for multi booting as well as Linux/Unix/FreeBSD. Installing Linux/Unix/FreeBSD after Windoze will ensure your Windoze boot files are not damaged. With Linux/Unix/FreeBSD you the user has access to source code and can manipulate all aspects of programming and are only limited by your imagination. With M$ you get what they give you with no way of manipulating the closed secret source code (rumored to have been stolen). Therefore using Linux/Unix/FreeBSD gives you the customer control

I have experienced when downloading the same file from the same server I consistently get better download speeds with Linux than I do with Windoze on the same system, I have tested this numerous times. Linux must handle netcode better, this alone would improve game play substantially, as one of the biggest problems with online play is lag, of which netcode is a part of. A dedicated Linux server alone would improve online play as evidenced by every other online game that has released a Linux based dedicated server. Oleg does not offer a Linux dedicated server like every other popular online game. The superiority of a Linux dedicated server cannot be disputed.

Windoze does not allow for the full potential of the game, Linux/Unix/FreeBSD with superior graphics, stability, networking, and 64 bit capability is clearly the way to go, only a mad man would port to Windoze only.

It is the game developers that are in hindering the transition of customers to OSâ's other than M$ and M$ knows it.


Hopefully the game developers will start listening to their customers and start porting to the more capable OSâ's and allow us to experience the full potential of the games. Personally I am sick of paying for games that only play on an inferior OS, give me the full capability for my money I say.

So remember when a pusher tryâ's to push you to use a M$ product, JUST SAY NO!

Vulgar

609IAP_Recon
06-15-2004, 10:06 PM
"Many more people in the world are aware of Linux and use Linux than what Americans are aware of, simply because M$ does not want anyone to know that there is a choice other than Windoze"

Nice anti-American comment. Sorry buddy, but we know all about Linux over here, it's a much larger world than the one in your head.

Salute!

IV/JG51_Recon

http://www.forgottenskies.com/jg51sig2.jpg

VulgarOne
06-15-2004, 11:38 PM
Almost forgot for those that are using Wine as an emulator to run Windoze programs in a Unix environment. You may be having some difficulty getting buttons to work on your joystick, here is a module that may help you out. http://qjoypad.sourceforge.net

JFW have you taken in account that Unix/Linux/FreeBSD will run most languages. I have run numerous Windoze not to mention stuff like Atari 800 programs through an emulator. You can run all those games you have collected over the past 20 years on one computer. www.winehq.com (http://www.winehq.com) for Windoze on Linux, also take a look at www.linux.org (http://www.linux.org) , look for applications then emulators. MAC has itâ's own programs that achieve the same thing, or are the very same programs used with other Unix/Linux OSâ's. As for changing header files and other things like dllâ's, and such, programs like winedev can allow a program to be written in one language for one OS then compiled to run on another OS. A game developer would use the same ideology and once set up compile for what ever OS. Would you not think the developers that are releasing versions for multiple OSâ's would not be using the very reasoning behind developing computers?

It really is amazing what the human mind can come up with, problem is people forget the basis of what computer language is, binary, the 0 and 1. What does change is the language humans use to better formulate binary code. Hence our dilemma, only the future will show what is held for us, will marketing or practicality win out? I can only hope that human kind will take the time to learn the basics rather then let fast and cheesy marketing prevail.

VulgarOne
06-15-2004, 11:56 PM
JG50_Recon

I am a service connected veteran of the US Army, ex 82nd Airborne. It has nothing to do with anti American sentiments. It has to do with a company that runs a monopoly. What Americans hear and what is true is very different. Money and power buys advertising and drives so called common knowledge.

I have been in financial services for over 15 years among other industries in the past 26 years. I have been using and building computers for 24 years. I have seen all industries change due to technology, yet the most misunderstood to the average person is what is Unix.

Every dog has itâ's day, and itâ's time people lift the wool from over their eyes. But then as long as people decide with emotions rather than using analytical thought. Their conclusion will be as yours.

Good Day Sir,
Vulgar

pegon1
06-19-2004, 08:54 AM
typing this on my new Powerbook 12" 1,33. The best portable i ever had. Porting FB to Mac makes perfect economical sense, the developing cost of the sim has already been payed off by the sales to the PC market. Oleg can license the porting to one of the many companyes that do this, and the relatively few sales in the Mac market are offset by the fac that there are no competitors. Allso most people that buy FB, are return customers, paying for every addon, making for a steady revenuehttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

WB_Outlaw
06-19-2004, 10:09 AM
I'm sure the cost analysis for porting to Max/Linux/Unix has already been done. The results were obviously negative or Maddox likes flushing money down the toilet. Either way, don't get your hopes up.

The thought that there is a difference between the information available about Linux here in America versus abroad is, at the very least, nonesense.

The number of Mac/Linux users is meaningless. The only thing that counts is how many will purchase a particular product. Since many Linux users are using it b/c it runs better on less powerful hardware than Windows, most of them can be counted out of the flight sim market. You won't get 20 fps ever on a 366 Mhz K6-2 and a Riva TNT2.

The only reasonable non Windows option for a computer USER is a Mac and Macs are very expensive compared to Intel/AMD architecture.

Linux and the desktop has nothing to do with some grand Microsoft conspiracy to hide information from the public. When Linux gets to the point where a computer USER does not have to wonder about which distribution/window manager/desktop to run, whether the right GTK/Python/Perl/etc. libraries are installed for the particular RPM they want to install, whether their Kernel was compiled with the right module options, or the several thousand other things that Windows users never have to worry about, then Linux will rule the world whether MS likes it or not. It will not be too much longer and I for one can hardly wait.

-Outlaw.

Aaron_GT
06-19-2004, 12:41 PM
"JFW have you taken in account that Unix/Linux/FreeBSD will run most languages."

Indeed, the Israeli government has been somewha annoyed with Microsoft that it has not been supporting Hebrew, but Linux has.

With regards to the costs of porting to Linux,
it would be very time consuming to port the existing IL2-FB-AEP code to a Unix or Posix environment. Given a possible project from the ground up (I don't know how close to this BoB is) and assuming that it targets only OpenGL and SDL, it isn't too bad, apart from needing a compatibily layer for threads, net code, and more testing. If the developers are used to writing threads and sockets with Visual C++ then there is going to be a learning curve. (Visual C++ threads and sockets are actually very nice to use - something Windows has done well in terms of the API).

Testing is going to be hard work, though - there are dozens of potential flavours of Linux out there, and they mutate more quickly than Windows. You could only really target
and test on the major releases - Suse, Redhat,
Lycoris or whatever Walmart is using, the one they are using in South America (Star) and TurboLinux and RedStar (Far east) and JDS (which is basically Suse again)

With regard to the suitability of Linux for games - the 2.6 kernel is going to be a lot better due to being preemptible. (Once everyone has patched the floating point overflow).

Remember too that it is Darwin that is FreeBSD, rather than OSX. OSX is the combination of Darwin (the open source bit) with all sorts of APIs on top.

In any case, the way to do it would be
OS (WIndows, Linux, Mac) overlayed with
a threads and sockets layer (probably bought in) and then SDL and OpenGL then BoB.

It can be done - you get UT for Linux.

TO me, given the apparent popularity of FB in China, and the rise of Linux in the far east, a Linux version would make sense, but maybe Oleg's team is too stretched and not ready to make a major change. It's a big decision, after all.

Aaron_GT
06-19-2004, 01:01 PM
"Linux and the desktop has nothing to do with some grand Microsoft conspiracy to hide information from the public. When Linux gets to the point where a computer USER does not have to wonder about which distribution/window manager/desktop to run, whether the right GTK/Python/Perl/etc. libraries are installed for the particular RPM they want to install, whether their Kernel was compiled with the right module options, or the several thousand other things that Windows users never have to worry about, then Linux will rule the world whether MS likes it or not. It will not be too much longer and I for one can hardly wait.
"

It's farily rapidly becoming less of an issue. (And some of us remember the dll hell of windows 95 and massive system instability, so MS doesn't have an unblemished record here, although XP is streets ahead of 95). What is becoming more common is to have a module-based system for selecting versions of software. If you look in some versions of linux you will see an /etc/profile.d directorz with various scripts in which can set up paths to various libraries and so on. In some cases this can be to different versions. Suse also has some workarounds for jvm versioning. There are all sorts of tools that support lists (almost like the registry) of installed versions too. What is needed is some closer versioning of packages in the file system to make it easier to set paths, and bob's your mother's brother.
Well not quite, but you get the idea.

It's not really so much of an issue for just installing software, it is more that it can be a pain with some hardware, but that is also improving, if more gradually. I've had some hardware be impossible to install on Linux, and some, like my TV card, were a pain in the *** on windows, but were detected and automatically configured without problem on Suse 9.0. However, having upgraded to Suse 9.1 my soundcard needs to be removed and readded )takes about 90 seconds) each boot before sound works.

However, with regards to BoB, by the time it is out then provided manufacturers are prepared to help (binary drivers a la NVidia seem the best way to go) then it could be a non-issue for Linux.

Aaron_GT
06-19-2004, 01:05 PM
VulgarOne Wrote:
"To say that there is not enough customers is nonsense."

Indeed - Sun just signed a deal with the Chinese government for 1 million copies of JDS (basically Suse Linux, Gnome, reskinned) with a possible option of 99 million more copies. If just 0.1% of these bought a game from 1C...

Aaron_GT
06-19-2004, 01:07 PM
VulgarOne:
I wonder if anyone has done GNU/Darwin (as opposed to GNU/Linux) - i.e. all the things associated with Linux (gcc, gnome, kde, etc) but are technically not, but on a Darwin core. I would expect this to be faster than Linux for games if a port is possible. Lots of the stuff is running already on Solaris (and there are rumours of a future JDS release on a Solaris x86 base)

Philipscdrw
06-19-2004, 04:52 PM
Why would it make sense for Oleg and co. to adapt FB to Unix et. al. when he should be developing BoB? Oleg will make more money from PF or BoB than from Mac and Linux flightsimmers (both of them) who don't have access to a good PC. PF and BoB will reach more people than FB for Mac. Therefore Oleg should be working on PF and BoB.

And VulgarOne from your post I was confused whether 'Windoze' refered to Macro$haft WinDOS or some utility for interfacing Windows with Unix.

PhilipsCDRw

"Nietzsche is dead." - God.

View Cpt. Eric Brown's review of FB here (http://www.aerosociety.com/raes/news/SimReview.pdf) and discuss it here. (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=309109534&r=875101634#875101634)

Aaron_GT
06-20-2004, 03:11 AM
"And VulgarOne from your post I was confused whether 'Windoze' refered to Macro$haft WinDOS or some utility for interfacing Windows with Unix."

It's not worth porting FB or PF (basically the same code) but it might be worth tatgetting BoB more widely, if the staff can get used to a threads and/or sockets compatibility. If the netcode from FB is being used then it might be harder to port.

In terms of the current Win32 API reimplementations for Linux, they are wine (the base one), and winex and crossover office which are based on wine with extra features

BaldieJr
06-20-2004, 07:41 PM
OS HOLY WAR! WOOHOO!

You can have my FreeBSD when you can pry it from my cold... nevermind. You'll NEVER get my FreeBSD!

Its the best. Be sure.

Spinnetti
06-21-2004, 10:35 AM
Me too!

I know Oleg says no Mac, but I bet it would run better on the latest G5 than on the latest PC.

Its this dang game that keeps me having to have a high end PC kicking around... Otherwise, it would be Mac all the way!

csThor
06-21-2004, 10:52 AM
I am against porting. I have been working in the IT branch for a few years now and I have yet to see a privately owned Mac over here (Germany). I have see na few Macs in companies, but I can count them on one hand.

Additionally I do not believe porting a game is as easy as many people think. I have been following the process of WBIII over the years and I remember a lot of teething problems because of issues with features which were easy on PCs but horribly complex on Macs.

______________________________

<A HREF="http://www.il2skins.com/?action=list&authoridfilter=csThor" TARGET=_blank>
http://home.arcor.de/csthor/bilder/ubi_sig.jpg </A>

csThor's skins @ Il2skins.com

xanty
06-22-2004, 06:31 AM
Hi CSThor:

I have my own Mac at home. It is not just Design workspaces or businesses.

I own a G4-Cube (which is a deligh, small and quiet) that I upgraded to a 1.2Ghz G-4 and a Radeon 8500. This goes nicely with a 23" wide-screen monitor (which works also on the PC)
I mainly use it for web design and some home tasks like sufr web, emails, photos, etc, as well as design or even video. I feel I could use the mac for everything, but I still need to have a current and good PC fror 3dsmax and Il-2/H&D. Shame really... If both max and Il-2 were Mac too, I would leave the PC behind.

http://www.silence.plus.com/xanty/stuff/fb_sig.jpg

csThor
06-22-2004, 07:06 AM
Sorry Xanty, but I disagree. FlightSims are a niche market withing the PC game market and Macs are a niche within the Computer market. I heavily doubt that porting a niche market game to a niche market platform - and therefore using ressources that could be used for making the program itself better - is wise. As I said I know no single person who has a Mac privately and my encounters with business Macs were extremely rare.

______________________________

<A HREF="http://www.il2skins.com/?action=list&authoridfilter=csThor" TARGET=_blank>
http://home.arcor.de/csthor/bilder/ubi_sig.jpg </A>

csThor's skins @ Il2skins.com

Aaron_GT
06-23-2004, 04:20 AM
Porting would be hard work and not worth it, but designing from the ground up to be OS independent, thus insulating you to changes in the OS market could make sense. Many companies do this now, and some with games.

The Mac is very nice, and Darwin is very good, but Macs are niche due to cost. Personally I'd target Darwin/BSD on PowerPC rather than Mac per se, as this is more crossplatform.

In reality Linux (Far East and South America) and Xbox2 (power pc based) are going to be bigger.

What Oleg might have his eye on are the emerging developer tools which may make development for windows and xbox2 convergent and be betting that this will be a bigger market than windows/linux/bsd/mac. The xbox2 might have enough horsepower to run BoB online, if not enough memory for offline. But developing for windows/xbox2 would effectively preclude the windows/linux cross platform route as the underlying tools would be very different and doing both would doublebthe effort required. I'm a bit concerned that the tool changes on windows might make it hard for winex to keep up, and I doubt Microsoft will be keen to release APIs to allow intereoperability no matter what the EU says!

So much as I'd like to have a native Linux BoB, and even though it is technically feasible, I doubt we'll see it http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

xanty
06-23-2004, 04:40 AM
Hi again:

I am not saying that there MUSt be a Mac port of the game. I admit that would be very unlikely, if any because they don't seem to be doing it for any other platform.

However, I disagree with your "I never met a mac owner b4"... I am, so are some 4-5 of my mates, and the 8 Macs at work, plus the rest of the building I work in it must be about 50... And many more I am sure. Still, maybe only 10% of the market, but not that rare.

Games like Medal of Honour, warcraft or WW2 Online are availiable, but there is a lot to be desired. They also ported Maya to the Mac and Pixar uses mainly Macs to create their films. It is a serious platform that has not been taken that seriously... specially doe to misinformation, intertia on sales and prices. However, there is a lot to be said about the Mac (but this is not the right place to discuss them)

BTW: Targetware has a nice version of the game for the Mac, and works quite OK, even in an average Mac.

http://www.silence.plus.com/xanty/stuff/fb_sig.jpg

PBNA-Boosher
06-25-2004, 08:10 AM
We will never sell our souls to the Devil... I mean.. We will never sell our souls to Macintosh Computers!

Seriously, buy a PC. More games for it anyway. You can have the Mac for graphic work, but other than that, they aint worth much. A PC has a lot more options to work with, and therefore, can better suit the average man or woman's needs.

Slechtvalk
06-25-2004, 08:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PBNA-Boosher:
You can have the Mac for graphic work, but other than that, they aint worth much. A PC has a lot more options to work with, and therefore, can better suit the average man or woman's needs.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hear the wise man speaking! sorry but this is just your opinion and not even close to the truth.

Philipscdrw
06-25-2004, 08:09 PM
It would probably be cheaper and easier to give a top-notch PC to all Mac flightsimmers (all three of them http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif )

Didn't Mac engineers have a contest to see what household items a computer could look like? The guy who chose 'Anglepoise desk lamp' won.

PhilipsCDRw

"Nietzsche is dead." - God.

View Cpt. Eric Brown's review of FB here (http://www.aerosociety.com/raes/news/SimReview.pdf) and discuss it here. (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=309109534&r=875101634#875101634)

pegon1
06-25-2004, 11:43 PM
compaired to the average pc that look like a pile of firewood http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif

Aaron_GT
06-26-2004, 06:40 AM
The Mac architecure is very good (the power pc chips are very powerful). They are also very
well engineered, but they cost the amount that
a very well made PC would cost, but to appeal
to the mass market they need to cost much less.
The e-Mac addresses that, I suppose, as it does
all the average email-internet-office user
needs, but some users like to have a 500Ghz
machine even though ripping a CD is the most
the machine will ever be called on to do! But
if Apple licensed the design and software and
there were a dozen less well made clones, it
might damage the Apple name and niche market.
If they can make enough to be happy selling
what they do, then fair enough. It would be nice
to see someone produce GNU/Darwin to supplement
GNU/Linux, though. Also the Xbox 2, if rumours
are correct and it will be power pc based, will
bear some relationship to the Mac, based on the
processor at least.

lbhskier37
06-26-2004, 12:35 PM
Linux would be the smarter choice. At least then you can use up to date hardware without having to sell your car. The G5 is cute, but it is a workstation and nothing more. If they think they can call a $3000 computer a personal computer, they are crazy. The average PC today costs under $1000. The other bonus with linux is you can use the latest video cards, but not like you would need them in Mac. And to all the mac faithful in here that think FB would run faster on a Mac than on the latest PC gear, I think you are sorely mistaken. Number one because the latest PC gear includes videocards that are twice as powerful as what you can get in a Mac right now, and number two because it wasn't originally coded for Mac and would just be a port. If BoB was written specifically to be crossplatform to begin with, and if you could get the latest video cards on Mac, it might be close. But you would still have to buy a G5 WORKSTATION to run it.

http://lbhskier37.freeservers.com/pics/Killasig6.jpg (http://www.il2skins.com/?action=list&whereauthorid=lbhkilla&comefrom=display&ts=1049772896)
Official "uber190n00b"

"Due to the unbelievable inadequacy of Oleg's .50s the Germans have a HUGE advantage.
All they do is dive from above and in one pass cripple your plane with three or four mk108 hits." Col_Tibbetts

Aaron_GT
06-26-2004, 01:19 PM
"And to all the mac faithful in here that think FB would run faster on a Mac than on the latest PC gear, I think you are sorely mistaken. Number one because the latest PC gear includes videocards that are twice as powerful as what you can get in a Mac right now, and number two because it wasn't originally coded for Mac and would just be a port."

You can, AFAIK, get ATI 9800 Pros for Mac, so there hasn't been much difference in terms of the graphics power available until the very latest cards that almost noone can yet afford.

With regard to performance, the PowerPC can perform approximately twice the Flops per MHz peak as tbe most recent long-pipeline Intel chips. Getting the best out of the Power PC takes a little more effort as ideally you would want to take advantage of the online vector processor. If you are using standard maths functions, though, it is already done for you in optimised libraries.

Going into the technical stuff the Pentium line has what is now an archaic architecture for access to main memory. It only dents performance a little in single processor machines but is a big problem as you add more. The PowerPC, Mips, Sparc, and now AMD64 are better on this (tending towards NVMA). No doubt we'll see a new Intel architecture very soon now that Intel is adopting the AMD64 chipset and will need to compete head to head.

Intel also shot itself in the foot a bit with long pipelines. Mispredicts are a big problem if memory to act on is in cache - 30 or 40 wasted cycles. It does allow the MHz to be cranked up. Again Intel is following the trend again and shortening pipelines.

Bad news coming up: Moore's law on a single chip will no longer work. Good news: multicores (smp at a chip level).

lbhskier37
06-26-2004, 01:53 PM
I know you can get 9800 Pros now, but like I said you cant get the newest cards. The X800Pro is out now for PC and even the 9800XT isnt out on Mac. As for performance I basically agree with you "Getting the best out of the Power PC takes a little more effort..." I am saying that just porting over from our windows version wouldn't give the best performance, if Bob was started directly with code optimised for PowerPC it would be a different story. About your comments on Intels architecture, it has some dated parts, but what matters is that although it takes the brute force approach, it still performs on par or better than anything anybody else has. Although Flops per MHz is much higher in a PPC, as you can see with the Opteron(Athlon FX) and its performance against the Pentium Extreme edition, is not all that matters. And on to Moore's law, its dead for everyone, not just Intel. Remember a year ago when G5 was released and Jobs told us it would be at 3ghz by now? Well its not even close, and IBM says it wont be for a long time. The .09 micron process is broken for everyone. In the end the PPC G5 is a great chip but the way Apple is positioning it, its not gonna be in many desktops. With the demise of G4 desktops, it looks like apple is segmenting its market to the professional workstation market (dual G5) and the low end computers as decoration market (Imac) and leaving common desktop stuff with nothing.

http://lbhskier37.freeservers.com/pics/Killasig6.jpg (http://www.il2skins.com/?action=list&whereauthorid=lbhkilla&comefrom=display&ts=1049772896)
Official "uber190n00b"

"Due to the unbelievable inadequacy of Oleg's .50s the Germans have a HUGE advantage.
All they do is dive from above and in one pass cripple your plane with three or four mk108 hits." Col_Tibbetts

OldMan____
06-26-2004, 04:31 PM
Just explaining. A WELL MADE game is easy to port to linux or like (I know it... since that is my work). A game developed with bad software engineering can be almost impossibel

If brute force does not solve your problem... you are not using enough!

Aaron_GT
06-26-2004, 05:06 PM
"Getting the best out of the Power PC takes a little more effort..."

That goes for all chips. You can get the basic out of it easily, but maximising performance requires tuning on all systems. Many principles of the programming are common (sequential array access, maximum of independent data to the compiler/microcode system can schedule data and instructions more easily). You can probably still put in extra tweaks for a Pentium EE that you wouldn't on an Opteron, even if running in 32 bit on both machines. With the Power PC the vector processor is a bit of an oddball. However if you are using standard maths routines, the work is done for you in terms of them having already been vectorised for you. I am sure you could get more performance by custom coding for a flight sim, of course.

"About your comments on Intels architecture, it has some dated parts, but what matters is that although it takes the brute force approach, it still performs on par or better than anything anybody else has."

For single processor yes. But Intel is apparently dumping their old processes, picking up AMD64, and changing a lot. The old Pentium 4 long pipeline process is essentially dead in the water, as is the whole northbridge design.

"Although Flops per MHz is much higher in a PPC, as you can see with the Opteron(Athlon FX) and its performance against the Pentium Extreme edition, is not all that matters."

Partly a function of the large cache in the EE and the benchmarks. If the benchmark includes lots of cache misses, then the EE will start to struggle as it has two hops to get to system memory rather than one. In an SMP system it will do even worse. This having been said, you want to write code that avoids cache misses, but it gives you an idea of worst case behaviour. In a 2 or 4 processor system the Intel design has more hops to main memory than the AMD64, plus contention in that access. Mind you, the causes of the behaviour don't really matter so much as the end result, except that if a chip line is going to have a limited upgrade in that process it means you are likely to have to replace your motherboard for an upgrade, not drop in a new chip.

"And on to Moore's law, its dead for everyone, not just Intel."

Yes, I was just throwing in a side note there. Mutli cores are the way things are going to go. Everyone is planning multi cores (either present now, or within the next year or so). It might well be quite an issue for cooling systems, which is my concern. I've got my PC relatively quiet now, but with 50% more heat coming off a chip...

LW_Icarus
06-27-2004, 08:10 AM
I cant speak for linux users. but in general, mac users are not game players. the mac is used extensively for graphics/publication work, and is the official artist/musician computer of choice.

I know this because I was/am a mac user as well, and built my pc as a gaming rig since there are no good titles for the Apples.

although OSX is based off of linux I believe there would still be wark involved in making a linux compatible program work properly in OSX.

so the arguement that there wouldn't be enough demand for the effort involved may be valid.

and no, virtual PC is meant to run business apps and would never be able to run il2FB faster than a slideshow, so thats not a good solution either. new AMD processor sounds like a winner.

you can find x-plane and Fly!II for Macs though, and they do look awesome for their relative age

Aaron_GT
06-27-2004, 10:10 AM
" although OSX is based off of linux"

No, they have different histories. OSX is based on BSD. Linux is a rewrite, influenced by Minix, which was influenced by UNIX in general. There has been cross polination, but Linux is not based on BSD or vice versa.

Aaron_GT
06-27-2004, 10:12 AM
X-Plane is still in development!

Actually if there could be a layer for BSD or MacOS like wineX for Linux, it might provide a way forward.

Most of the work needed to port a program to OSX is in the interaction with OSX. If you could keep everything to the underlying BSD layer (aka Darwin) and cross-platform apps (Java, OpenGL) etc, it would be _so_ hard. What you need is a cross-compatible netcode and threading layer to make life easy.

OldMan____
06-27-2004, 10:20 AM
Mac OSX and linus are not usually used by gamers not because they are worse for this or their users don't like it.. its because they DONT HAVE GAMES!!!

I am linux user (only has windows for IL2) and me and my friends have ALL games that come to linux. And we would LOVE to have more.

Remember.. you have lesse users.. but NO CONCORRENCE.

If brute force does not solve your problem... you are not using enough!

LuftKuhMist
06-27-2004, 02:49 PM
What are you doing with a mac?

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/MOMS.gif http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/grab0004.jpg

Willey
06-27-2004, 03:56 PM
I'd prefer Linux... mostly because of the Dedicated.

Aaron_GT
06-28-2004, 01:36 AM
One problem with targeting Linux is the rate of change. The windows kernel gets changed relatively rarely, but people can update Linux kernels often. This would make testing more complex. However, it seems possible to produce games successfully on Linux so this would not necessarily be a barrier. However, with something working at a level that impacts the kernel's scheduling quite hard, like a game, I'd be offering a Linux version without warranty if I was running 1C.

Menthol_moose
06-28-2004, 03:51 AM
niche flight sim on a niche computer format isnt going to sell well guys. And we want oleg to put max effort into the pc version thanks :P

Whats apples market shares 4% ? (excluding ipods )

The turtleneck sweater boys are just gonna have to do without http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif