Posted 17 March 2006 - 12:50 AM
If true, why have I seen no posts regarding this?
If False, will Memron support this? Memron will be able to be installed in all current Yonah units so this still is not all bad news.
Posted 17 March 2006 - 03:03 AM
I think the fact that people are just now getting these macs to boot windows at all is a sign that virtuliziation is a little out of our reach at the moment. Tho, i'm drooling at the thought...
also, just because the yonah boards might be able to take a mermon chip (true?), virtulization (and other new features) may require a new chipset to support them...
it's getting pretty mac in here...
cheers to those who are working on this, i'm saving up for a macbook pro(or whatever might come next that is)
Posted 17 March 2006 - 04:15 AM
Posted 17 March 2006 - 09:47 AM
What doesn't support it (at least, not in a confirmed fashion) is the Radeon x1600, and much of the other hardware... and of course you need a hypervisor and a Virtual Machine Manager to actually divvy up the hardware and sort all the state details out at runtime.
Lots of work is going into Vista's new video driver model to support many simultaneously active 3D draw surfaces on a card (increase from 2 (xp) to 10 if memory serves) which is what gives Vista its graphical sweetness. This work could lay a foundation for virtualization, but you still need to have a VT concept at the GPU and memory level...
After all, how can you simultaneously maintain two video framebuffers? Say you're playing a DVD fullscreen in OSX and playing Half-Life 2 fullscreen in Vista on the other virtual half of the machine. Which side gets priority? Or do you see a brilliant combination of both (half-life 2 overlayed with a huge full-motion DVD image)? Or what if you played HL2 on XP and Warcraft III on OSX at the same time? Who gets the sound card? Both games are 3D-accelerated... how does the GPU manage that and keep the frame buffer and zbuffer and shader pipelines and all the other buffers intact?
My example is crude, but i think you get the point.
We've got a ways to go before VT will be a practical reality for end-users.
Posted 17 March 2006 - 10:33 AM
"A port of Windows XP was developed for an earlier version of Xen, but is not available for release due to licence restrictions."
Xen 2 without VT needs a modfied kernel, that was the reason why MS was working but not supported only Linux or Unix.
With VT and Xen 3 a Windows should run now without modifications.
But will OSX run without modifications or has the iMAC/MBP VT?
Posted 17 March 2006 - 07:30 PM
Get a single core mac, a single core PC, two monitors, and a KVM switch for just your keyboard and mouse.
i'd like to run OSX and WinXP simultaneously on dual mintors, with each OS using a core.
Posted 18 March 2006 - 03:16 PM
Admittedly, we've run into some Intel-specific oddities with the new
Macs, but we are working through them; it wasn't looking good for a
while, but we're finally seeing some light at the end of the tunnel,
and we're still hopeful that a March release is not just possible but
We just want to ensure that any Intel-based emulation solution we
release will be fully tested, compatible and simply work.
> You got some press about 5 weeks ago about how you were going to
> have iEmulator running on intel macs with good windows performance
> by the end of Feb. I was trying not to bug you, but I was just
> wondering if you had any more news...
Posted 18 March 2006 - 03:41 PM
The chips (meaning the Yonah core duo processors) do support VT.
Actually someone on the forum contacted intel about this and were told that the current stepping does not support VT, even though the specification says they do.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users