- #MACINTOSH ROMS JOHN BARLOW HOW TO#
- #MACINTOSH ROMS JOHN BARLOW DRIVERS#
- #MACINTOSH ROMS JOHN BARLOW SOFTWARE#
- #MACINTOSH ROMS JOHN BARLOW CODE#
- #MACINTOSH ROMS JOHN BARLOW MAC#
Indeed, the Brazilians also cloned a few PPC macintoshes back in 1997, I believe. It happens today too, but now the only problem are the high taxes. Meaning that the law won't differentiate a Brazilian-made IBM computer from an imported Macintosh. Brazilian law indeed had a very harsh policy towards importing of "national similar". I went to law school for 2 years before moving to a computing faculty instead. This was done in Brazil, which is interesting for me, since I was raised there.
They are talking about the Macintosh 512K here. in fact, in the final shipping version it was substituted by static RAM, which was loaded from a special pre-boot floppy." As a result, the resulting ROM was originally double the size of Apple's.
#MACINTOSH ROMS JOHN BARLOW DRIVERS#
everything was coded in C, except for some critical device drivers and the QuickDraw emulator which were done in Assembly language. I was a consultant for that team and eventually did most of the Toolbox managers.
#MACINTOSH ROMS JOHN BARLOW SOFTWARE#
"At the same time, a software team reverse-engineered the ROM, based on the 'Inside Mac' specifications. Doing this with older OSes however (especially pre-System 6), would be a lot trickier.
#MACINTOSH ROMS JOHN BARLOW CODE#
The good part about this is that it becomes easy to insert code in between the two to monitor all the call passing and drop support for the old ROM calls when they're not needed.Īs such, it should be fairly easy to write an engine that allows you to run software on System 7.5.3, as many of the system calls are actually handled by the System memory and not the ROM. The tricky bit here is that in many cases, the System actually bootstraps a bunch of the ROM calls which originally reside in ROM. As long as you do a clean reverse job instead of decompiling the ROM (look at the software that calls the ROM hooks, not the ROM itself), things should be legal. The good news is that at this point, the original patents would have expired and trade law isn't really an issue - so the only thing you really have to worry about is copyright. Of course, this would have to sit on top of some generalized stack, or else you'd have the behaviour changing each time you changed the host OS. It seems to me that for the 24-bit ROMs, most of the actual hardware interaction in the original ROMs doesn't really need to be reversed, beyond figuring out what the OS expected to have passed back to it for the various system calls and figuring out the timing.
Yes - I remember that :D I remember thinking at the time that someone didn't know the difference between disassembling and reimplementing a product and clean room reverse engineering (which is what Ardi did). I have no idea whether someone could get away with the same thing nowadays with much older hardware that Apple has long since stopped caring about, but then there do seem to be numerous sites that get away with openly offering old ROMs. Of course, Bleem! ended up sued into oblivion and Sony bought VGS and killed it, so this strategy, however legally sound, was evidently not successful in the long run. Remember Bleem!, one of the early commercial Playstation emulators? I forget the details (I might actually be thinking of Virtual Game Station), but I dimly recall they won a suit against Sony when they demonstrated that even though they had disassembled the Playstation BIOS ROM, they had purposefully re-implemented it in a different way that did not infringe on Sony's copyright. Someone mentioned in a thread a while ago that mini vMac already substitutes portions of its own code for routines in the ROM that handle hard disk access, so perhaps part of the job is already done there. I agree, a copyright-free ROM would be a triumph indeed.
#MACINTOSH ROMS JOHN BARLOW HOW TO#
Try to figure out how to copy a four-cylinder engine by throwing wadded-up Kleenex at the thing and seeing which way they get deflected, and you'll have an idea of how hard their job is." (From.
#MACINTOSH ROMS JOHN BARLOW MAC#
In other words (as one user sagely posted to the Executor newsgroup): "ARDI has had to figure out what's in the Mac ROMs without reverse-engineering them.
0 kommentar(er)
