Comments on: Mac OS X and Xen Optimizer? Is this relationship the future of Windows on the Mac? http://pintmaster.com/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/ Wed, 07 Jan 2009 07:06:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: pepangelist http://pintmaster.com/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/comment-page-1/#comment-17544 pepangelist Mon, 13 Nov 2006 23:29:25 +0000 http://www.pintmaster.com/wordpress/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/#comment-17544 Guys, just read http://www.scl.ameslab.gov/Projects/mini-xen/index.html and you can see Xen working on Mac-mini, but no MacOS X yet, though Guys, just read http://www.scl.ameslab.gov/Projects/mini-xen/index.html
and you can see Xen working on Mac-mini, but no MacOS X yet, though

]]> By: David Buttrick http://pintmaster.com/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/comment-page-1/#comment-12437 David Buttrick Thu, 05 Oct 2006 16:19:09 +0000 http://www.pintmaster.com/wordpress/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/#comment-12437 You wrote: > Mach is actually a pretty modern kernel, and as far as resources go, offers better utilization than some others. It is a microkernel deisng, and it uses more modern message passing techniques, which allow better communication between processes - this is built into the os, when you use the mach kernel... Also, Mach was the kernel chosen for the Next machine, which is of course where OS X came from - I think we forget that frequently. To see where you are, you need to know where you came from. You wrote:
>

Mach is actually a pretty modern kernel, and as far as resources go, offers better utilization than some others. It is a microkernel deisng, and it uses more modern message passing techniques, which allow better communication between processes - this is built into the os, when you use the mach kernel…

Also, Mach was the kernel chosen for the Next machine, which is of course where OS X came from - I think we forget that frequently.

To see where you are, you need to know where you came from.

]]> By: Tim http://pintmaster.com/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/comment-page-1/#comment-2873 Tim Fri, 24 Mar 2006 21:33:49 +0000 http://www.pintmaster.com/wordpress/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/#comment-2873 The TPM is virtualizable. A very thin domain multiplexes it, that domain is itself attested in the secure boot. http://www.xensource.com/files/xs0106_intel_xen_security.pdf technotes says: "the notion that a virtualizer can be interposed without detection violates the model" It's not done "without detection," it just inserts a layer in the attestation process. The TPM is virtualizable. A very thin domain multiplexes it, that domain is itself attested in the secure boot.

http://www.xensource.com/files/xs0106_intel_xen_security.pdf

technotes says: “the notion that a virtualizer can be interposed without detection violates the model”

It’s not done “without detection,” it just inserts a layer in the attestation process.

]]> By: igor http://pintmaster.com/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/comment-page-1/#comment-2859 igor Tue, 14 Mar 2006 22:13:06 +0000 http://www.pintmaster.com/wordpress/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/#comment-2859 I am not sure whether OS X license allows running the OS as a guest. Did anyone ever contact Apple for clarification? Is there a precedent? Running Xen with Linux as a ring 0 OS should be simple enough, as it should theoretically be equivalent to booting Linux on MacTel. Running [patched ?] OS X under VM has been done according to plenty of folks, but that's not legal therefore not a practical long term approach... In a few months there will be plenty of Workstation products for MacTel hosts, so what's the big deal? I am not sure whether OS X license allows running the OS as a guest.

Did anyone ever contact Apple for clarification? Is there a precedent?

Running Xen with Linux as a ring 0 OS should be simple enough, as it should theoretically be equivalent to booting Linux on MacTel.

Running [patched ?] OS X under VM has been done according to plenty of folks, but that’s not legal therefore not a practical long term approach…

In a few months there will be plenty of Workstation products for MacTel hosts, so what’s the big deal?

]]> By: technotes http://pintmaster.com/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/comment-page-1/#comment-2838 technotes Tue, 07 Mar 2006 18:58:20 +0000 http://www.pintmaster.com/wordpress/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/#comment-2838 If you lay out OS X in a block diagram, you'll see that Mach and Xen are completely different layers. Saying the Mach Kernel is an interface to hardware is like saying the engine in a car turns the tires. At one time Mach research was heavily funded by much of the computer industry and DARPA. These days, it's pretty much just Apple and even they only use a remnant of what was originally produced. The Mach interfaces have always been slow and I vaguely remember seeing some OS X context switch tests that highlight the problem. It's hard to see what benefit it provides. Xen is no more a combination of holy grail, mouth wash and floor wax than Mach was. When these kinds of ridiculous claims are made people should realize that similar claims were made about Mach (and others). BTW, a TPM should not be virtualizable - it defeats one of the underlying premises (that ever component running on the is registered as it runs). It IS possible for a Virtual environment to be trusted and in turn provide access to the TPM but the notion that a virtualizer can be interposed without detection violates the model. Any claims to the contrary should be highly suspect. Would you buy a product from from someone making that claim? If you lay out OS X in a block diagram, you’ll see that Mach and Xen are completely different layers. Saying the Mach Kernel is an interface to hardware is like saying the engine in a car turns the tires.

At one time Mach research was heavily funded by much of the computer industry and DARPA. These days, it’s pretty much just Apple and even they only use a remnant of what was originally produced.

The Mach interfaces have always been slow and I vaguely remember seeing some OS X context switch tests that highlight the problem. It’s hard to see what benefit it provides.

Xen is no more a combination of holy grail, mouth wash and floor wax than Mach was. When these kinds of ridiculous claims are made people should realize that similar claims were made about Mach (and others).

BTW, a TPM should not be virtualizable - it defeats one of the underlying premises (that ever component running on the is registered as it runs). It IS possible for a Virtual environment to be trusted and in turn provide access to the TPM but the notion that a virtualizer can be interposed without detection violates the model. Any claims to the contrary should be highly suspect. Would you buy a product from from someone making that claim?

]]> By: Karl http://pintmaster.com/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/comment-page-1/#comment-2820 Karl Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:52:44 +0000 http://www.pintmaster.com/wordpress/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/#comment-2820 Actually, the new Intel iMacs have Intel's VT built-in. All Intel Core Duo processors do (The Register and other sites reported that it didn't. They're wrong. Take it from someone who has a Core Duo T2400 noteboook sitting in front of them, that's reporting it supports VMX instruction set ;)). Actually, the new Intel iMacs have Intel’s VT built-in. All Intel Core Duo processors do (The Register and other sites reported that it didn’t. They’re wrong. Take it from someone who has a Core Duo T2400 noteboook sitting in front of them, that’s reporting it supports VMX instruction set ;)).

]]> By: Steve http://pintmaster.com/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/comment-page-1/#comment-2802 Steve Wed, 08 Feb 2006 01:48:51 +0000 http://www.pintmaster.com/wordpress/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/#comment-2802 Another email... Note he says Q3 06. Yes, in theory Xen could do all of this. Indeed Xen can even virtualize the TPM to enable MacOS to securely boot, and support Vista licensing and TCB. We will have a Windows on x86 product in Q306. It may just solve this problem, but I'm not sure. Let me think this through for a bit and get back to you. We're talking to Apple, that's all I can say right now. Another email… Note he says Q3 06.

Yes, in theory Xen could do all of this. Indeed Xen can even virtualize the
TPM to enable MacOS to securely boot, and support Vista licensing and TCB.

We will have a Windows on x86 product in Q306. It may just solve this
problem, but I’m not sure. Let me think this through for a bit and get back
to you.

We’re talking to Apple, that’s all I can say right now.

]]> By: Steve http://pintmaster.com/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/comment-page-1/#comment-2798 Steve Tue, 07 Feb 2006 04:06:44 +0000 http://www.pintmaster.com/wordpress/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/#comment-2798 I just emailed Xen about this. Here is their reply: Stephen I read the blog, and it's wildly inaccurate. Here are some facts - feel free to put them on the blog as followup if you'd like: 1. Yes, one could run theoretically Win/Tiger on Xen, on a new Intel Mac however I personally have yet to see Xen run on the new Macs. 2. XenSource is not working on this as a product right now, but someone in the Xen community may be. Regards Simon I just emailed Xen about this. Here is their reply:

Stephen

I read the blog, and it’s wildly inaccurate. Here are some facts - feel
free to put them on the blog as followup if you’d like:

1. Yes, one could run theoretically Win/Tiger on Xen, on a new Intel Mac
however I personally have yet to see Xen run on the new Macs.
2. XenSource is not working on this as a product right now, but someone in
the Xen community may be.

Regards

Simon

]]> By: Daniel http://pintmaster.com/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/comment-page-1/#comment-2797 Daniel Mon, 06 Feb 2006 14:35:11 +0000 http://www.pintmaster.com/wordpress/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/#comment-2797 Since Xen is opensource, the build that this guy is using should, theoretically, be available. That being the case, it should be a simple matter to partition a hard-drive, install Xen+XP on one partition, OS X on the other and have a dual-booting system today. Seems to me, this guy could claim the $10k tomorrow if he wanted to. Since Xen is opensource, the build that this guy is using should, theoretically, be available. That being the case, it should be a simple matter to partition a hard-drive, install Xen+XP on one partition, OS X on the other and have a dual-booting system today. Seems to me, this guy could claim the $10k tomorrow if he wanted to.

]]> By: Zetetic http://pintmaster.com/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/comment-page-1/#comment-2796 Zetetic Sun, 05 Feb 2006 20:08:12 +0000 http://www.pintmaster.com/wordpress/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/#comment-2796 Um... Microsoft licensing issues prevent the Xen-compatible version of Windows XP/Xen-implementation under Windows XP from being released to the public. Is this not a large problem? Um… Microsoft licensing issues prevent the Xen-compatible version of Windows XP/Xen-implementation under Windows XP from being released to the public. Is this not a large problem?

]]>