What I'm saying is that Nova needs memory bandwidth most of all, and I'm just not sure how well a hacked-together machine would have done that.

Also, what I call acceptable might be shocking to you. I used to beat other people at Marathon while playing in the smallest screen size, double-pixeled, and at 5-10 frames per second. I'm used to slowness.

Do you want to join the Kemet team? We have lots of slow computers for you to use

Heh, cheers, but I'm cool. I have lots of stuff underway right now, and I'm already 6 days late with my ARPIA2 graphics.

There's always WNE + WinNova.

Ragashingo, on Jul 1 2005, 05:45 PM, said:

You understand wrong. Macs will be running on Intel Pentium processors. The "move" from Motorola to IBM was nothing because both the G3 G4 and G5 all make use of the PPC instruction set. In moving to Intel Apple is moving to the X86 instruction set, the same thing just about every PC out there uses.
View Post

The move referred to is not G4 to G5, it's 68k to PowerPC. They are quite different processors and for many years MacOS shipped with a 68k emulator so old programs, such as maelstrom, could be played. OS X ditched that, hence why it didn't work using classic mode.

Also, Rosetta has nowhere near the overhead of classic. Classic runs MacOS 9 in a virtual machine. Think Java with a whole OS as the overhead. Rosetta translates a single application and still uses the rest of the OS natively, it'll be much faster.

pipeline, on Jul 5 2005, 11:42 AM, said:

Let's hope it doesn't, because I don't see Nova being made native on this new platform.

Dave @ ATMOS
View Post

It should initially, being pure Carbon. However, I assume Nova still uses QuickDraw which is officially deprecated as of 10.4. It'll probably stick around for 10.5, but who knows after that? We'll need EV:4, won't that make someone happy