If nothing happens, so what? Least we learnt something.Īs for Luigi's site, I have to agree. And then homebrew stuff on the Wii can really lift off.Īt least, after that happens, we can really put those ideas into practise to see if they do anything. We need more people like Andreas Naive around that are skilled in this sort of maths, so then the Wii's encryption algorithm is busted. Hmmm, what I am personally am interested in is the encryption algorithm. In regards to aluigi's site: That is just AMAZING. I have no way to test my ideas yet, but when I can, I would like to have some ideas to look at or if someone else is looking for ideas to look into exploiting the Wii, a place for people to start looking or experiment with would be a neat find.Īnyway, it would be awesomeif someone used the keyboard to hack the Wii lol, it was just an idea though. I dont have a decrypted copy of firmware to trace to find out if they did or not. Though I'd like to know where you thought Mac drivers for the Wii graphics chip were going to come from. Had you looked up system architecture, or even just admitted you didn't know what the phrase meant instead of making wild-ass guesses, we could've spared ourselves this round of idiocy. Drive format is PURELY at the software level and the Wii has no native hard drive support. Which sent you into some insanity about filesystems that has nothing to do with anything.Īnd in fact would be NO ISSUE WHATSOEVER were it possible to actually run Mac code on the Wii. "The "Classic" apps were written for an entirely different system architecture."
Or as you phrased it, "The way a program or OS or processer interacts with that hardware specifically." I was speaking of the hardware that interfaces the CPU to said peripherals. I was never speaking of minor peripherals. Or does "the rest of the hardware" to you mean "some subset of the non-CPU hardware"? That would seem to include EVERYTHING, not just sound hardware. The REST of the hardware is just too different." I think it was QUITE obvious that I meant the entire system, not just one or two peripherals when I said "An Amiga can't run MacOS, even though both systems were 68k-based. In this context, and with my phrasing, they ARE the exact same thing. I just needed a better explanation, because I don't know all this stuff yet. I can still use the same OS and programs, can't I? Suddenly I have hardware mixing and no noise from the motherboard interfering with my audio. If I am using the onboard audio of my motherboard, and then insert and use a sound card, the hardware is different.
"Hardware being different" is very general. The second can be thought of as a subset of the first, while the first is a generalization that covers the second. "The hardware being different " and "The way a program or OS or processer interacts with that hardware specifically being different" are the EXACT same thing.