Awesome!

I just wish that the new emulator by TI would accommodate more than the 84.

corey

When's the OS X version going to be released?

That depends on Christian Walther, he's the one testing things on OS X and either committing fixes or bugging us to commit them. :-)

As far as I know, the version in the newsitem already compiles on OS X. The tigcc-debugging-branch failed to build last time, I fixed the failures, but maybe there are more. As for easy-to-install binaries, let's see when everything compiles. :-)

By the way, you will definitely need to install X11 (either Apple's X11 or XDarwin) to run TiEmu, as there is no native (non-X11) OS X port of GTK.

Thanks. I need this to test things for my 89T. So this release should compile on OS X as well, correct?

Thanks.

I think so. But you'll need to scrub up all the dependencies somewhere (you need the Apple development package (with their GCC, assembler, linker etc.), GTK+ 2.4 or higher libraries and headers and the libti* libraries, and maybe some more stuff I've forgotten (you'll notice when you get an error from configure ;-) )).

finally!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! thanx so much 4 this new emulator, cuz virtual ti did nothing 4 me!

Wow, I can't express how thankful I am for an emulator that finally will port to OS X. Yes, people do use "that other os." (to those who told me to get a "real operating system" when I asked about an emulator for os x perhaps a year ago...) Right now, I'm getting ready to build by filling dependencies w/ fink. = )

Well, in principle, there's nothing keeping you from running Linux on your Mac. ;-)
http://www.bytebot.net/ geekdocs/ibook/ fedorappc.html
You don't have to abandon OS X to do that, you can join the ranks of most of the PC Linux users and dual-boot. :-)

But of course, being able to run TiEmu on the OS of your choice is nicest. As I said, we're working on it, the 2.00 RC1 probably compiles out of the box on OS X, and the tigcc-debugging-branch is being worked on.

oh, of course, I once had ubuntu running on another partition, but i think they were suggesting i install windoze.. ; )

Maybe they were, but TiEmu actually runs better (faster!) on Linux than on Windows.

It runs better on NT-based Windows rather than others.
About GiMP which uses the same GTK+ package:
<<The GIMP should run on Windows 98/ME/NT4/2000/XP. It is recommended to use an NT-based version of Windows (NT4, 2000 or XP). Starting with GIMP 2.2 and GTK+ 2.4, older versions such as Windows 95 are not supported anymore.>>

OS X is the real operating system ;-)

Of course. As is only logical.

@#$?! OS X is just another OS that claims to be the best. Honestly, I don't see whats so great as you can't even play Half Life 2 on it.

*sigh*... I don't even know why I'm replying to this, but for the last time, you can't judge an OS by the games that are written for it!

No, it doesn't claim to be, it is. It's not an ugly OS like windows, it's a lot more stable. Windows still have problems with security. And when is Longhorn going to be released?

I'm not sure how Windows is "ugly", but... Personally, I never really cared for the way the MacOS file system is organized.

And, users of MacOS X are really missing out on one of the greatest features of Windows...BLUE SCREENS OF DEATH FOREVER! Lastly, with MacOS X, you can't just take over any computer you can find (Windows program flaws)

I'm going out to buy a Windows comp now :-)
I say ugly, due to the harsh primary colours used everywhere (green start bar, blue task bar, failed copies of osx's high-res icons, etc.)

>>I'm going out to buy a Windows comp now :-)
I thought you hated PCs!

I did, until you mentioned the greatest feature of Windows.

Actually, you could, via kernel extensions, but then you have to be at least a reasonably sophisticated programmer.

And a programming team at the MacHack conference, I think in 2002, made a kernel extension to replicate Windows BSoDs when a program crashed. So you can have them, if you really, really want.

I hear longhorn is going to have a special RSOD for big errors and a BSOD for small errors.
That means more RSOD's than BSOD's!

Even better!

And how is the MacOS file system significantly different from the Windows file system?

1. Different filesystem formats - irrelevant, given that MacOS can read any Windows FS (or almost any FS, period), and that this implementation is invisible to the user, in most cases.

2. Different places to store stuff:
Documents:
Windows: C:\Documents and Settings\myUserName\My Documents\
Mac: /users/myUserName/Documents/

Desktop:
Windows: C:\Documents and Settings\myUserName\Desktop\ and the fake top level of everything
Mac: /users/myUserName/Desktop/

Applications:
Windows: C:\Program Files\ or wherever the h___ the programmer wanted it
Mac: /Applications/

Operating system:
Windows: C:\Windows\
Mac: /System/

3. The pictures look different - also irrelevant, as I could take ten seconds right now and change all the folders on my Mac to look like Windows XP yellow. I won't, of course, because I like my gradient blue stripey folders.

And Windows isn't necessarily ugly, but I do think that Mac OS X's Aqua is far cleaner and more esthetically appealing.

> And Windows isn't necessarily ugly, but I do think that Mac OS X's Aqua is far cleaner and more esthetically appealing.

And it doesn't have the greatest features of Windows.

And what would that be? A propensity to crash at the slightest provocation?

The BSOD, of course.
I just can't live without it!
The wonderful shade of blue surpasses macOS's stipy gradients.

The bugginess, the BSOD, you know... ;-)

d00d!

The Mac file structure and organization is significantly different from the structure and organization of Windows files, making portability difficult, not some invisible task! Mac OS uses HFS and HFS+, whereas Windows uses FAT. Mac OS uses 32-bit Creator and Type strings in it's file header to identify parent applications and types of files respectively, whereas Windows uses 3-4 character extentions in the name string in addition to some file header information to do the same. Mac OS splits all of it's files into separate data and resource "forks" for easy storage (although this isn't visible through the GUI), whereas resources and data are crammed into one file in Windows. All of this can't be ignored--you need extra 3rd party software to read Windows files, and even they cannot read ALL Windows files (i.e. Windows executables cannot be converted or read yet because the Windows-based system traps, the references to DLLs, the difference in chip architectures, etc., cannot be effectively emulated). In short, making up for differences in FSs hasn't been reduced to a background task yet.

Actually, Win2000 and XP use NTFS for the default filesystem. Also, older versions of Windows use FAT32, not FAT (which implies FAT16).

But you can play halflife, though why you would want to, I don't know...

You mean it's slow?

No, although in Virtual PC emulation it probably is except on a 2.0+GHz G5, I mean that I think games of that sort are boring, stupid wastes-of-time-and-money. The most sophisticated RPG I've played was Gemini on my 83+, and that was plenty enough for me.

But that's just my opinion.

Mine too.

Tell me if you find a version of GTK 2.4+ for Panther. For some reason, nothing will run.
RPITA

Have you thought about using wxWindows instead of GTK+? Then you could have a native version on all three platforms.

wxWindows is heavy, not well-designed and does not include any GTK+ 2.x support yet.

Actually, it does (wxGTK2).

And the wxWidgets developers even have this to say:

<< wxWidgets no longer supports GTK 1.0.x (as did some early
snapshots) and support for GTK 1.2.x will be phased out
over time. Nearly all work is now done on GTK 2.0.x and
quite a few of the enhancements of GTK+ 2.2.x and even
GTK 2.4.x are used. >>

TiEmu currently works on Mac OS X, but it requires a lot of external software, some of which is available from Fink, some isn't. I haven't spent much thought yet on how to do a binary release that's neither too big (à la Gimp.app) nor creates too much of a dependency hell.

You're welcome to try a recent Subversion checkout or source snapshot (I must confess I didn't try RC1 yet, but I guess it should work). Read the archives of the tiemu-devel mailing list (link) to see what I did and post there if you have problems (or solutions).

I don't think the package size is that much of a problem. The Windows version of the tigcc-debugging-branch is 4 MB compressed (the non-GDB version is 2 MB compressed), and the required GTK+ package (which also contains stuff like iconv and zlib) is another 5 MB compressed. Still, people download it. :-) And there's hardly any way to get the size requirements much down on Windows.