MoM Abandoned?

Wetzel
2005-10-10
2013-04-09
  • Wetzel
    Wetzel
    2005-10-10

    MoM looked like it had a lot of promise when it first appeared, but it seems like there has been no development since.  Any comments on the state of MoM's development?

     
    • joop
      joop
      2005-12-11

      Bastix, are you dead?

       
    • joop
      joop
      2005-12-21

      I mailed him. This was his respons:

      Hi,

      due to the upcoming Intel switch I see no need for a PowerPC VM for OS X.
      I'm working on some other projects now and I don't think that I'll have time for MoM.
      Sorry.

          -Sebastian

       
    • Romain Ballais
      Romain Ballais
      2006-01-13

      Great ;( ....

      And sure, all the PPC users will switch to Intel-based machines in 2006 and never again their "old" computers bought in 2005...

      Just stupid...

       
    • BastiX
      BastiX
      2006-01-21

      Hi,

      well I am not dead :)
      Basically the problem I have is that the Mac-on-Linux
      development seems to be discontinued as well and
      as long there ist no G5 support I've no ambition to
      contiune this project. Well of course everybody
      is free to grab the source and do with it whatever
      they consider to do.

       
    • CannibalCorpse
      CannibalCorpse
      2006-01-24

      you still maybbe have some errors because i seem to not be able to boot it up and i sent you a msg but u still nvr reply to it please do so.

       
    • The funny thing is that the Intel transition is the very reason I'm interested in MoM.  There's no Classic support for Intel-based Macs.  If MoM worked in Tiger, you could run it in Rosetta and use it to replace this functionality.

       
    • James W
      James W
      2006-04-12

      I too would love to see this app running on Tiger!
      Please please :-)

       
    • CasioGTM
      CasioGTM
      2006-04-20

      Does any body remember or seem to know where we can get a copy of Mac OS.app it came with Mac OS X developer preview and from what i remember it was an old version of classic.app that ran pretty much like an emulator would. i think it also existed on Mac OS X server 1.2 or Rhapsody.

      Thanks.

      I too wish MoM would continue especially with intel in our macs.

       
    • Ronald
      Ronald
      2006-05-04

      At first I was very exited about MOM, but  as soon as Apple made it clear that future Macs would not be build around PPC processors, it was clear to me that there is no future for MOM anymore, because MOM (like Mac-On-Linux from which it is derived) will work on PPC processors. That is what MOM made special, it will run natively on PPC.

      Better now have have a look at SheepShaver. It can be used with MacOS 7.5.2 through 9.0.4 and compiled versions are available for MacOSX 10.2.8 and later on PPC and for MacOSX 10.4.4 and later on Intel.

      The MacOSX versions are still very much in early development, they do not have a Graphical Interfaced yet and trying them is not for the faint of heart, but the latest version for MacOSX on PPC works fine on my PowerBook G4 with MacOSX 10.4.6. In SheepShaver I have MacOS 8.6 running, with sound support and (very slow) network support.
      <http://www.gibix.net/dokuwiki/en:projects:sheepshaver>

       
    • Ronald
      Ronald
      2006-05-04

      The SheepShaver link does not display correctly in the message I posted just now.
      Use <http://www.gibix.net/dokuwiki/> and follow on that page under "Projects" the link SheepShaver.

       
    • User218
      User218
      2006-07-02

      I would like to use Mac-on-Mac to run Ubuntu Linux, which just came in a new version. PPC is not dead just because of the Intel announcement. Look at how big the emulation scene is, for example. Please reconsider. I do understand you, though, because for anyone, time is limited, but I hope someone else will take over the project.

      Also, I'm having trouble compiling the newest alpha version.

      I would greatly appreciate if you could post a compiled binary, at least, Sebastian.

       
    • kvitske
      kvitske
      2007-01-02

      I just saw this project and it was love at first sight, but now I found out it wouldn't run on OS X 10.4 and certainly not on Intel Mac, and that is really too bad... this project was unique, and for Intel people it would be great, because some apps only have a OS 9 installer, but a OS X updater, and installing them in OS 9, transporting to OS X and installing the update doesn't always work, so please continue development on this unbelieveably great application!

       
    • Ronald
      Ronald
      2007-01-18

      MoM is abandoned because it has no future. Further development would be a waste of time and effort. MoM is based on virtualisation on the PPC processor and there is no way to make it work on Intel.

       
    • Tom Bradford
      Tom Bradford
      2007-04-01

      I disagree that there is no justifiable use case for MoM.

      For me, I think the most personally appealing reason to continue the work of MoM is that I do quite a bit of network appliance development for the PowerPC platform (on OpenBSD), wherein quite a bit of kernel modifications are required.  For me, it would be far more efficient to have a virtualized environment, performing remote debugging to it rather than to have two separate machines set up.

      What is the current status of the project in regard to completeness and support?  Is it far enough along that the effort to get it up to speed wouldn't be incredibly daunting?

       
    • Robert
      Robert
      2007-05-18

      I found MoM because I was looking for something to virtualize Ubuntu for PPC in Tiger.

       
    • DDStuff
      DDStuff
      2007-12-12

      I still see some good uses for MoM. For example, testing out an app made in 10.5 and making sure it works in 10.4, 10.3, and maybe 10.2. Checking for bugs and such. Does anyone really want to have multiple Macs to test this out? I don't think so. It'll take time, but time is money these days.

      Or just to fool around with the program just for the heck of it. I mean, how about OS 9 on Intel Macs? SheepShaver isn't that good to use for anything above 9.0.4. I mean, really... :(