PDA

View Full Version : Microsoft Officially Kills Virtual PC


MacRumors
Aug 7, 2006, 06:00 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Microsoft has announced that it has halted development on a universal version of VirtualPC.

In a statement on Monday, Microsoft said it "has made the decision not to move forward with a Universal version of Virtual PC at this time." -- via News.com (http://news.com.com/2100-1012_3-6102930.html?part=rss&tag=6102930&subj=news)

VirtualPC has long-been the king of the hill for Virtualization on Macintosh. With the Intel transition, however, came competitive pressure from Parallels (http://www.parallels.com/en/products/desktop/), which has since released the final version of its product, and VMWare which is showcasing a beta (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060805151513.shtml) of its solution at WWDC.

Microsoft has claimed that to port VirtualPC to Intel would be much like making VirtualPC 1.0 all over again.

Because of how closely virtualization software is tied to an operating system, Microsoft said that moving Virtual PC to the Intel-based Mac would be "similar to creating a version 1.0 release."

Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Microsoft_Officially_Kills_Virtual_PC)

SuperSnake2012
Aug 7, 2006, 06:02 PM
Go Parallels! :cool:

noservice2001
Aug 7, 2006, 06:04 PM
good, that was hard to use anyway...

yg17
Aug 7, 2006, 06:04 PM
Wasn't there a rumor going around a couple months back about M$ making VPC free? That would make sense now if they're going to discontinue it, and let us PPC users have it for free. Who wants to pay for a product that won't receive any updates?

narco
Aug 7, 2006, 06:05 PM
Is that the best you got, Microsoft?

Freyqq
Aug 7, 2006, 06:05 PM
I guess there was no reason to continue. They were prob not making much of a profit on VPC anyhow and 3rd parties already had it covered.

Are they working on a universal MS Office?

darwen
Aug 7, 2006, 06:05 PM
So many remarks... so little time...

Steve Jobs probably hurt their feelings today
Maybe now they can finally get some work done on vista
Or quite possibly they thought it was dumb to run fake OSX in real OSX

longofest
Aug 7, 2006, 06:07 PM
Wasn't there a rumor going around a couple months back about M$ making VPC free? That would make sense now if they're going to discontinue it, and let us PPC users have it for free. Who wants to pay for a product that won't receive any updates?

No... that was a lot of people getting confused. MS was giving away VirtualPC 2004, which is a Windows product. They never were giving away any Mac products, nor were they intending to as far as we know.

Are they working on a universal MS Office?


Yes, but we don't exactly know when that will come out. Look for it AFTER Vista (if that can happen) ;)

Over Achiever
Aug 7, 2006, 06:09 PM
I can't say I'm not surprised, but I'm glad we have other options (that run well) at this time. I just hope this doesn't carry over to Microsoft Office (which has a separate Mac team from Vista I understand)

BKF
Aug 7, 2006, 06:10 PM
All because of those Vista 2.0 cracks?

inkswamp
Aug 7, 2006, 06:16 PM
Anyone else remember those old rumors about how MS was buying VPC just to kill it off? I thought that was silly back then, but I'm wondering now. Considering how they sat on the thing for ages and never really did anything with it and now have caved at the first sign of competition, you have to wonder. They clearly were not very committed to keeping it going.

DakotaGuy
Aug 7, 2006, 06:18 PM
Why would they? The Intel models will run Windows anyhow. I don't think there would be much of a market for this product since the move to Intel is complete.

DOUGHNUT
Aug 7, 2006, 06:19 PM
just use Parallels or VMWare

Flowbee
Aug 7, 2006, 06:20 PM
MS seems to have lost out on a nice little market due to dragging their feet so long with VPC. That being said, I think it's great that we no loger have to rely on MS to keep Windows (and other os's) running on Macs.

bluarash
Aug 7, 2006, 06:21 PM
Yes, Parallels and VMware are better products, but that is not the point. Has no one else noticed the number of products Microsoft is canceling for the Mac. I do not believe that Microsoft sees a market for the Macintosh. This of course is purely a business perspective.

I for one think Apple will be taught a lesson in respect. The only logical solution is to kill off Mac Office universal binary support. If they want to run on the Intel platform, they can run on emulation.

It would not be much of a loss if Microsoft decided to pull the plug. Don't think they haven't taught about it. A three percent market share or 19 million desktop users does not even come close to the numbers that still use Windows 2000, never mind Windows 98. I of course don't wish this to happen, but it is one logical outcome.

Flowbee
Aug 7, 2006, 06:21 PM
Why would they? The Intel models will run Windows anyhow. I don't think there would be much of a market for this product since the move to Intel is complete.

Tell that to the Parallels people. Bootcamp isn't the same thing.

kevinuaa
Aug 7, 2006, 06:21 PM
I think think this may mean they are close to announcing a universal version of MS OFFICE. VPC was a part of the Office pro version, and they probably decided not to wait to complete the universal version of VPC.
Cheers,

Cameront9
Aug 7, 2006, 06:22 PM
So with WMP gone and now VPC gone, the only MAJOR software developed for Macs by Microsoft is Office?

Let's just hope they don't decide to kill office. Sure, I know there are lots of alternatives out there, but you try telling that to Mr. idiot joe-average boss.

Edit: Looks like I spoke too soon, fortunately:
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/08/07/universal.office.coming/

DakotaGuy
Aug 7, 2006, 06:24 PM
So with WMP gone and now VPC gone, the only MAJOR software developed for Macs by Microsoft is Office?

Let's just hope they don't decide to kill office. Sure, I know there are lots of alternatives out there, but you try telling that to Mr. idiot joe-average boss.

Yeah, Office will stay. They said they are committed for at least 5 more years. Office is probably the only Mac software they develop and actually make a decent profit on.

maxp1
Aug 7, 2006, 06:24 PM
Wonder how much they paid Connectix just to abandon it.

bigandy
Aug 7, 2006, 06:25 PM
since they never created a 1.0 of Virtual PC (they just bought it), how do they know? :rolleyes:

DakotaGuy
Aug 7, 2006, 06:26 PM
Tell that to the Parallels people. Bootcamp isn't the same thing.

True to use Bootcamp you actually have to re-boot the computer. I see what you are saying.

Thataboy
Aug 7, 2006, 06:27 PM
So with WMP gone and now VPC gone, the only MAJOR software developed for Macs by Microsoft is Office?

Let's just hope they don't decide to kill office. Sure, I know there are lots of alternatives out there, but you try telling that to Mr. idiot joe-average boss.

Edit: Looks like I spoke too soon, fortunately:
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/08/07/universal.office.coming/

Microsoft is not developing Visual Basic in the Univeral Mac Office suite, so some people are already claiming that cross-compatibility is officially dead. Unless someone comes up with a Rosetta-like translator between VB and AppleScript/Automator, I don't see how script-filled Office files will be able to leave a Mac-only or Windows-only environment.

soosy
Aug 7, 2006, 06:28 PM
Nice timing of the announcement. Trying to rain on the WWDC parade...

dejo
Aug 7, 2006, 06:29 PM
Wonder how much they paid Connectix just to abandon it.

Next step: Microsoft announces they've acquired Parallels, Inc.

balamw
Aug 7, 2006, 06:30 PM
Wonder how much they paid Connectix just to abandon it.
You do realize that Microsoft bought Connectix (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connectix) out entirely. They're part of the Borg now. It's all Microsoft's decisions now...

B

idea_hamster
Aug 7, 2006, 06:30 PM
If I were an MS shareholder, I would be OUTRAGED.

How much did they pay for that? To be fair, I don't recall if MS bought just VPC or all of Connectix, but it hardly matters!

That's got to be a giant pile of shareholder wealth pissed away in a half-assed attempt at being part of (read: smothering) the increasing popularity and utility of Apple.

I would really love to see the numbers on that boondogle.

:rolleyes:

Additionally:
Yes, Parallels and VMware are better products, but that is not the point. Has no one else noticed the number of products Microsoft is canceling for the Mac. I do not believe that Microsoft sees a market for the Macintosh. This of course is purely a business perspective.

I for one think Apple will be taught a lesson in respect. The only logical solution is to kill off Mac Office universal binary support. If they want to run on the Intel platform, they can run on emulation.

It would not be much of a loss if Microsoft decided to pull the plug. Don't think they haven't taught about it. A three percent market share or 19 million desktop users does not even come close to the numbers that still use Windows 2000, never mind Windows 98. I of course don't wish this to happen, but it is one logical outcome.
I actually think that MS will eventually be taught the lesson. Unfortunately for MS, federal antitrust law states that you can't use your power in one market to gain power in a different market.

At first glance to me, killing Office for Mac is probably a violation, since I think that the operation is, in itself, profitable. After all, the "at cost" price for Mac Office that MS charges its employees (yes, they can buy it!) is $50.

longofest
Aug 7, 2006, 06:32 PM
Microsoft is not developing Virtual Basic in the Univeral Mac Office suite, so some people are already claiming that cross-compatibility is officially dead. Unless someone comes up with a Rosetta-like translator between VB and AppleScript/Automator, I don't see how script-filled Office files will be able to leave a Mac-only or Windows-only environment.

I noticed that too... I have no idea why they are going to be killing off VB support, but say good-bye to being able to have compatability with any documents with Macros.

balamw
Aug 7, 2006, 06:33 PM
I would really love to see the numbers on that boondogle.
They got their value out of Connectix in Virtual Server. Like it or not the Mac stuff was just the tip of the iceberg.

After reading the Wiki article I linked to I am also not sure how much of Connectix was bought by MS.

B

joeboy_45101
Aug 7, 2006, 06:34 PM
It probably won't be long before they kill off Office for Mac and Messenger for Mac. I just hope that iWork is mature enough by then to handle the office needs of some users.

DJMastaWes
Aug 7, 2006, 06:36 PM
Cry babies.

They can't take away office... They signed a 5 year contract to continue makeing Office for mac at MWSF 2006.

Thataboy
Aug 7, 2006, 06:37 PM
I noticed that too... I have no idea why they are going to be killing off VB support, but say good-bye to being able to have compatability with any documents with Macros.

I think we need to lean on the MS Mac BU to reverse this decision, and we need to make it VERY CLEAR TO APPLE that this will have major ramifications to the use of Macs in the corporate environment. Maybe Apple can lean on them (with what leverage, I don't know).

Of course, Microsoft can just turn around and say "Well, you want VB so badly? Buy Parallels, Windows, and MS Office 2007. Sure, it's $700, but you Apple users are used to getting fleeced."

Some_Big_Spoon
Aug 7, 2006, 06:38 PM
Who wasn't expecting this one? Show of hands. :rolleyes:

Object-X
Aug 7, 2006, 06:40 PM
Let's face it, Microsoft can't compete. It won't be long before they kill off their whole mac unit. Who needs their crappy software anyway? When some little known Russian software company can do in months what Micrsoft can't do in years it's obvious where this is going. VMWare will come out with a better virtualization technology and Windows will continue to become irrelevant. iWork needs a spreadsheet and you'll be hard pressed to find a reason to run anything Microsoft on your mac.

I said it before on these posts and got laughed to scorn, Microsoft is dead. Everyone knows it. Even die hard Windows fanboys are starting to have doubts. Vista will fail miserably and the company will be broken up. Why anyone would use something second rate, more expensive, less secure, and of inferior quality in the light of such a polished and mature operating system is beyond comprehension.

DJMastaWes
Aug 7, 2006, 06:40 PM
Who wasn't expecting this one? Show of hands. :rolleyes:
I did not expect this.
MS should understand that it's the truth. They copied Mac OS X SO MUCH. That's what they get...

BoyBach
Aug 7, 2006, 06:40 PM
It would not be much of a loss if Microsoft decided to pull the plug. Don't think they haven't taught about it. A three percent market share or 19 million desktop users does not even come close to the numbers that still use Windows 2000, never mind Windows 98. I of course don't wish this to happen, but it is one logical outcome.

Maybe so, but there are millions of Mac being sold every year, and there will always be percentage of these users who are perfectly willing to buy Virtual PC, Mac Office, Windows XP, and eventually Windows Vista when it's released, to use on their Mac's. Remember, that's a lot of money, and would Microsoft really not want to have their share of the pie?

IJ Reilly
Aug 7, 2006, 06:41 PM
I seriously don't understand why anyone is surprised, or concerned. Some of us predicted the demise of VPC when Apple announced the Intel transition. This product is obsolete, now that Parallels can do the job better and Boot Camp enables complete Windows installs.

nagromme
Aug 7, 2006, 06:41 PM
I'm sorry to see it go, since it's something I think they could do a good job with--and likely have offered bundled with a Windows license for a decent price.

But at the end of the day, it's not a product that's needed. There are other choices now.

BlueRevolution
Aug 7, 2006, 06:43 PM
And good riddance. VPC, Office Mac and Macromedia Studio 8 under Rosetta are the only apps I've found that can do an accurate job of emulating OS X running as sluggish as Windows.

Some_Big_Spoon
Aug 7, 2006, 06:44 PM
Wasn't a rumor, and it wasn't the PPC/Mac version.

Wasn't there a rumor going around a couple months back about M$ making VPC free? That would make sense now if they're going to discontinue it, and let us PPC users have it for free. Who wants to pay for a product that won't receive any updates?

Hemingray
Aug 7, 2006, 06:46 PM
Good riddance! :rolleyes:

Bloatware, unusable since like what, version 3? 4?

What with all the new emulators coming out (and being a fairly happy user of Parallels, although I wish they'd keep us more informed about updates, but that's another subject!) I won't miss VPC one bit.

RIP.

bryanc
Aug 7, 2006, 06:46 PM
Windows: a 32 bit shell running on a 16 bit extension of an 8 bit OS designed for a 4 bit CPU, made by a 2 bit company that can't stand one bit of competition.

Cheers

bryanc
Aug 7, 2006, 06:48 PM
Good riddance! :rolleyes:

Bloatware, unusable since like what, version 3? 4?


Isn't this exactly what we said when they killed IE. And we were right then too!

BoyBach
Aug 7, 2006, 06:48 PM
I just hope that iWork is mature enough by then to handle the office needs of some users.


I'm sure that it will be. Remember that Microsoft has recently signed a contract to continue developing Mac Office for the next five years, and that maybe part of the agreement was that Apple would keep iWorks 'underpowered.' But with the 'Numbers' and 'Charts' trademarks, do you not think that maybe iWorks '07 might replace Appleworks, which is no longer supplied with new Macs? A more mature Pages and Keynote plus some kind of spreadsheet app would be fine for the majority of users.

bigjohn
Aug 7, 2006, 06:50 PM
What no Virtual Vista?

Big w00p, it was broke-ware coming out of the box.

idea_hamster
Aug 7, 2006, 06:51 PM
Let's face it, Microsoft can't compete. ... I said it before on these posts and got laughed to scorn, Microsoft is dead.
Really? Who laughed? I wouldn't have. I've been predicting the slow collapse from internal rot ever since Word started .rtf format.

But you're right -- the process of moving from arbitrary, proprietary formats to generally accepted standards will be painful sometimes, but it will happen.

ImAlwaysRight
Aug 7, 2006, 06:53 PM
Well, glad I just sold my copy of Virtual PC for $130 yesterday. :cool: :)

On another note, the AI article adds this:

Sometime later this year, Microsoft said it will release its first Universal application, Messenger for Mac 6.0.

Now that's just sad that MS can't get Office universal before 2007. Bet they are pretty sore about Apple's latest cracks against Vista. :(

dswoodley
Aug 7, 2006, 07:01 PM
Cry babies.

They can't take away office... They signed a 5 year contract to continue makeing Office for mac at MWSF 2006.

That doesn't mean they have to make the best product they can or the one users want! All the macros I make for use on PC and mac are now going to be useless soon. Of course, MS corporate is well aware of this. This totally sucks for macro users.

shelterpaw
Aug 7, 2006, 07:02 PM
Is that the best you got, Microsoft?Nope, they've got 90% of the personal computer market. :p ;)

MikeAtari
Aug 7, 2006, 07:03 PM
Let's face it, Microsoft can't compete.

See, here's the problem.
They really can't compete. Microsoft's best guys are on the XBox project.
They are screwing up ACROSS THE BOARD.
- Their newest release of Exchange is a CRASH Nightmare.
- IIS 6.0 can be crashed with a Large Sql Query to a DataGrid.
- Their development staff couldn't handle "Checked Exceptions".
( Too lazy for Error Handling? )
- So, with something as Complex as Virtual Pc,
you have to wonder, how deep is the bench?
Not Deep Enough.

Microsoft, soon to be the: "Microsoft Game Company".
In games they're fairly competent.

iPost
Aug 7, 2006, 07:04 PM
Wow... Microsoft really is a shell of its former self. And not that its former self was all that great. But Microsoft used to be an amazing software factory in terms of productivity (quality was a different story). They used to brag about their ability to "turn the crank" and produce software products well before rivals could. Many were envious of this ability.

Now, they can't seem to get anything done. Everything is canceled, delayed, reworked. The company seems to be completely incompetent.

I have been a Mac fan since the original 128K Mac. But I'm also a realist and live in the Windows world as well. And years ago, before OS X came into its own, it really looked like the world had passed the Mac by. But not anymore! Now, Apple is the one firing on all cylinders and getting great products out the door.

I've used the early betas of Vista and let me tell you, it is bad... REALLY, REALLY BAD. And this is coming from someone who doesn't mind using WinXP when he has to.

The new reality is that the Apple OS X platform has moved into the forefront of this industry. OS X just works. Period. It's a joy to use. And things are still getting better! At Microsoft, things are getting worse... a lot worse.

I believe that it's finally time for the world to start a transition off of the Windows platform and onto OS X. I'm not sure if this means that Apple has to supply all of the hardware (although I'm sure they want to!). But the stuff coming out of Microsoft now is utter crap (I mean, it was crap before, but it was at least usable if you figured out all the quirks). Now, everything they produce is a disaster. The company cannot code its way out of a paper bag.

DJMastaWes
Aug 7, 2006, 07:08 PM
On another note, the AI article adds this:

Sometime later this year, Microsoft said it will release its first Universal application, Messenger for Mac 6.0.
Will they still go on with Messenger 6.0? Seeing as how they are crying about WWDC?

funguyom
Aug 7, 2006, 07:12 PM
i think microsoft should open source virtual pc, and give it to the community to port. :-) what will become of it?

Westside guy
Aug 7, 2006, 07:12 PM
I guess I'm not particularly surprised, and I wish we could hear all the reasoning that went into the decision (which, of course, we won't). But given that VMware just about owns the x86 virtualization market and has announced its foray into the Mac universe, I imagine Microsoft figured it'd be a lot of work for what figures to be very little profit.

It's not like we don't have options - I can't imagine Virtual PC will be missed. Those of us still using PowerPC processors can still buy VPC 7.

sushi
Aug 7, 2006, 07:17 PM
Disappointed to say the least.

Parallels is good no doubt about that. However, I figured that Microsoft could have done better now that we are on the Intel platform. Bummer.

MikeAtari
Aug 7, 2006, 07:17 PM
I guess I'm not particularly surprised, and I wish we could hear all the reasoning that went into the decision (which, of course, we won't). But given that VMware just about owns the x86 virtualization market and has announced its foray into the Mac universe, I imagine Microsoft figured it'd be a lot of work for what figures to be very little profit.


If it's PROFIT Microsoft wants, then why don't they DUMP IE7?
They can build ASPX to generate code to industry standard xHTML and CSS,
and save a FORTUNE. Plus, IE has been expensive to develop and keeps MS in the headlines with Exploit after Exploit, cementing their reputation for Low Quality Incompetent Software. So, if PROFIT was your motivation, why not dump IE and save some Real Money?

Cameront9
Aug 7, 2006, 07:17 PM
Will they still go on with Messenger 6.0? Seeing as how they are crying about WWDC?

I think they will, as AFAI can tell, they announced this at WWDC.

JoshH
Aug 7, 2006, 07:22 PM
Meh. I doubt it was ever very high on the MS priority list...

Maybe just slightly more important than a new version of Minesweeper.

Peel
Aug 7, 2006, 07:24 PM
The Mac BU also will provide free, downloadable converters to allow users of current versions of Office for Mac to read the new Microsoft Office Open XML formats following the availability of Office for Windows
So to paraphrase, they're saying, "We can code for the Mac faster than we can for windows, and the XML extension for the Mac is ready...but you won't see it until the people who can't even write code for their own operating system are done."

:p

macidiot
Aug 7, 2006, 07:31 PM
I submitted this post, but no credit... My submission came up on Macbytes...but no credit there either... :(

XCool
Aug 7, 2006, 07:33 PM
Probably they can't take all the Mac OS X Leopard - Introducing Vista 2.0
Hasta La Vista, Vista!
and had to give Apple a punch back? :D

Good riddance anyway... one less M$ software on my Mac... well, I don't install Virtual PeeCee anyway... :p

edenwaith
Aug 7, 2006, 07:38 PM
How come I'm really not surprised...maybe it's because I figured this would happen eventually several years ago when Microsoft bought VirtualPC. Too bad that they don't have a version of VirtualPC that runs on x86 hardware...oh, except for the version of VirtualPC for Windows...you can ignore that.

But considering how Microsoft has been dropping its limited Mac line left and right, it's really not too much of a surprise. With the stiff competition from those people who are actually doing some work and coming out with products.

How does Microsoft keep in business? When was the last time they released a major new product that made money? Office 2004? And that was for the Mac!

I certainly could be wrong about some things, but when you consider that Microsoft's two major money makers (Office and Windows) have been in hibernation for several years. Practically any other technology company that sat around that long would have been smeared off of the map!

SiliconAddict
Aug 7, 2006, 07:39 PM
Meh. What with Parallels and now VMWare. Who gives a crap. VPC was only a so so solution. Guys just wait until VMWare gets going. :D Parallels is good. VM WILL be better.

hulugu
Aug 7, 2006, 07:43 PM
Yeah, Office will stay. They said they are committed for at least 5 more years. Office is probably the only Mac software they develop and actually make a decent profit on.

The MBU is one of the more profitable parts of Microsoft, and they want to keep it for the money, for the leverage on Apple, and to avoid the immediate anti-trust lawsuit they'd face if they refused to support OSX.
There's lots of benefits to keeping the MBU alive and lots of downsides to killing it out of spite.

VPC was never really part of the MBU.

IJ Reilly
Aug 7, 2006, 07:45 PM
I don't see this as having anything directly to do with Microsoft's support of Mac products overall. The writing was on the wall for VPC the moment Apple announced the move to Intel; the only question is why it took so long. (But since when does anything at Microsoft happen quickly?) The interesting part of Microsoft's announcement was the timing. Apple and Microsoft seem to have taken to poking each other in the eye. More than a little spite in the timing, to be sure.

FoxyKaye
Aug 7, 2006, 07:45 PM
Wow, didn't see that coming. Caught me completely by surprise!

NOT

Given the alternatives on the market and in development, I'd just as soon see somebody else take a crack at it and let M$'s POS die.

Inkling
Aug 7, 2006, 07:48 PM
Good news! Virtual PC for Intel Macs never made much sense anyway. Why go to great pains to emulate an OS that can run native?

Even better good news would be for the Mac Business Unit to develop a Mac-only version of Vista. Since it would target a very narrow set of hardware, it could be leaner, faster, more stable, and contain all the proper hardware drivers. Spared many of the woes of other Windows users, we'd be happy, and Microsoft would make more money as Mac users buy copies to use with Boot Camp or Parallel. They'd make far more with Vista for Macs than they'd ever make with Virtual PC.

All in all, I'd say things are going quite well in the Mac world.

--Michael W. Perry, Untangling Tolkien (the only book-length chronology of The Lord of the Rings.

maxp1
Aug 7, 2006, 07:52 PM
You do realize that Microsoft bought Connectix (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connectix) out entirely. They're part of the Borg now. It's all Microsoft's decisions now...

B

Actually, according to that article it looks like MS bought their last viable product and they then de-established the company. A technicality, but different than being bought by MS.


Virtual PC and Virtual server emulation software of x86-based personal computers for the Macintosh and Windows (sold to Microsoft).

With the sale of Virtual PC development and support, staff were transferred to Microsoft, including Chief Technical Officer Eric Traut, but not including any of the Connectix board members or Technical Support. Its Macintosh products, including DoubleTalk, CopyAgent and RAM Doubler, were discontinued.

Senbei
Aug 7, 2006, 08:07 PM
No surprise since their intentions became obvious when they backpeddled over earlier comments made by a spokesperson during MWSF '06 after the keynote and also the subsequent length of time "spent evaluating" the feasibility while Parallels came in with an actual product. VMWare's confirmation they were entering the Mac market probably killed any remaining consideration.

"I just don't know what the hell I'm doing. Help! I need Help!"
Something was missing in that attachment....:D

Bradley W
Aug 7, 2006, 08:12 PM
_

Frisco
Aug 7, 2006, 08:13 PM
MS would only be looking to "cripple" Virtual PC anyway.

bigjohn
Aug 7, 2006, 08:17 PM
I believe that it's finally time for the world to start a transition off of the Windows platform and onto OS X.

Get Autodesk to switch and you've got a good start...

balamw
Aug 7, 2006, 08:18 PM
Actually, according to that article it looks like MS bought their last viable product and they then de-established the company. A technicality, but different than being bought by MS.
FWIW I corrected my earlier statement in Post #29 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2693362&postcount=29).

Something about these pics of Ballmer make me want to get up and shout "Developers! Developers! Developers!"

B

Chupa Chupa
Aug 7, 2006, 08:32 PM
M$ is funnnnnny. They don't want to admit it by they've been schooled.

phatpat88
Aug 7, 2006, 08:51 PM
No... that was a lot of people getting confused. MS was giving away VirtualPC 2004, which is a Windows product. They never were giving away any Mac products, nor were they intending to as far as we know.




Yes, but we don't exactly know when that will come out. Look for it AFTER Vista (if that can happen) ;)


NO!

Universal Office will arrive in Approx. Late Sept-Nov.

aafuss1
Aug 7, 2006, 08:52 PM
Yeah, Office will stay. They said they are committed for at least 5 more years. Office is probably the only Mac software they develop and actually make a decent profit on.
VPC will continue on Windows-but not on Macs.

macEfan
Aug 7, 2006, 08:54 PM
so does this mean VPC for mac is now free?:confused:

ezekielrage_99
Aug 7, 2006, 08:54 PM
Well I can't honestly say I didn't see this one coming, I think everyone had the feeling VPC was dead from sometime now.

ezekielrage_99
Aug 7, 2006, 08:57 PM
so does this mean VPC for mac is now free?:confused:

Nothing from MS is free....

mygoldens
Aug 7, 2006, 08:59 PM
VPC for the PowerPC was a sluggish piece. M$, if they can't steal it, they buy it or they GIVE UP. They do not have one person working at M$ that can develope technology.

I say FANTASTIC, GREAT, GOOD JOB, GO make Vista, Go try and make Vista!:D

bretm
Aug 7, 2006, 09:03 PM
Yeah, well except for the 5 year contract they signed with Apple to continue making office.

Even if that weren't the case, Apple is GAINING market share. Those are people that don't have office for Mac. Why would Microsoft shoot itself in the foot. People forget that Microsoft and Apple aren't actually in direct competition. Not until Apple releases OSX openly on any box.

Yes, Parallels and VMware are better products, but that is not the point. Has no one else noticed the number of products Microsoft is canceling for the Mac. I do not believe that Microsoft sees a market for the Macintosh. This of course is purely a business perspective.

I for one think Apple will be taught a lesson in respect. The only logical solution is to kill off Mac Office universal binary support. If they want to run on the Intel platform, they can run on emulation.

It would not be much of a loss if Microsoft decided to pull the plug. Don't think they haven't taught about it. A three percent market share or 19 million desktop users does not even come close to the numbers that still use Windows 2000, never mind Windows 98. I of course don't wish this to happen, but it is one logical outcome.

MacAddict1978
Aug 7, 2006, 09:04 PM
Office for the Mac will be a fixture. This is business, not high school slander wars. If the balance of money invested in R&D on a product vs. sales that turn a profit is lucrative, there will be a product.

For Virtual PC.... to invest the R&D in a product no one would buy would be stupid.

For Office.... even with Apple's lower PC market share, think this:

5 million copies X $200 = $1 billion in sales.

I don't know how many copies of Office for Mac Microsuck actually ships, but there are 10 million+ mac users... and I think a great majority of us need Office for work in some capacity.

edenwaith
Aug 7, 2006, 09:06 PM
just use Parallels or VMWare

Or DOSBox! I tried running a game under VPC 5 on a 400 MHz PowerMac G4. Too slow. So I then tried running it on a VPC 7 on a 1.25 GHz eMac. Still too slow. Then I tried running the game under DOSBox on the eMac. Ahhh, just right! Given that many of the games I still play are from the 80's or early half of the 90s, this works well for me, whether on x86 or PPC.

Another MS app which is being moved over as Universal app is RDC, which is probably my favorite MS application. I use this daily to work between my Mac and PC at work, and it works great, especially since I can use my second monitor for the PC, and still share both monitors for my Mac. A great VNC program for connecting to Windows. Too bad it can't connect to a Mac, also (I use Chicken of the VNC for that).

blasto333
Aug 7, 2006, 09:10 PM
Microsoft has to worry about bigger things than getting their OS to run on macs, how about getting their OS to run on a PC (IE: Vista).

Microsoft was late to the plate and I wouldn't be suprised if they just bought out a company to get back in the competition.

stunna
Aug 7, 2006, 09:21 PM
Windows: a 32 bit shell running on a 16 bit extension of an 8 bit OS designed for a 4 bit CPU, made by a 2 bit company that can't stand one bit of competition.

Cheers
damn
ROFL

nsjoker
Aug 7, 2006, 09:24 PM
Microsoft has to worry about bigger things than getting their OS to run on macs, how about getting their OS to run on a PC (IE: Vista).

Microsoft was late to the plate and I wouldn't be suprised if they just bought out a company to get back in the competition.

take it easy on them, they saved apple's ass in the 90's. if it weren't for them apple would have gone 'rupt. they also have to worry about a thousand different hardware configurations whereas os x 10 has to worry about the mac line.. give 'em a break. (not an ms fanboy) :mad:

Anonymous Freak
Aug 7, 2006, 09:31 PM
Wasn't there a rumor going around a couple months back about M$ making VPC free? That would make sense now if they're going to discontinue it, and let us PPC users have it for free. Who wants to pay for a product that won't receive any updates?

VPC is free for Windows. Not the Mac version. They can wring a little bit of life out of the PPC version yet, I'm sure. There's no (serious) competition on PPC.

Anonymous Freak
Aug 7, 2006, 09:40 PM
Windows: a 32 bit shell running on a 16 bit extension of an 8 bit OS designed for a 4 bit CPU, made by a 2 bit company that can't stand one bit of competition.

Cheers

Now we can add "A 64 bit hack of a 32 bit shell..." to the beginning.

Yeah, this joke has been around forever. It originally was used when Windows 95 first came out. It isn't technically valid for NT, 2000, XP, 2003, or Vista. Those are just 32-bit (or 64-bit) OSes by a 2 bit company. :-D

Bocheememon
Aug 7, 2006, 09:58 PM
I was digging on Wikipedia and other sources. I must have missed the part where Microsoft either sold or kept their stocks. I couldn't find hard evidence that they truly sold it. If they own 1/100 of a percent, then they are just keeping a light leash for some corporate reason.

But here is a hypothetical question you all should think of. I think of it myself sometimes. I'd like to and hope it isn't true.

Since Microsoft did help support competition between the two, what if they shared OS features? Anyone can lie up on stage if they are a good actor about their OS being original and that such and such company is copying them. But if Bill Gates struck another deal that allowed Apple to release the features we love in OS X before Vista, that would be unusual.

Just Question. I just get the feeling that something isn't right.

Asides from that, I never like hearing Ballmer talk on stage. It isn't because he is affiliated with Microsoft. He just talks in such a way that everything is generalized. "Vista will change the way you look at your computer" or something like that. He was ranting about MS Office creating new ways of writing a document. *sigh*

Oh and I use both platforms!

For gaming Athlon Alienware PC. I did a price quote to see if the All-New 7500 was similar to the Mac Pro on pricing.

It is 100-200 cheaper than the Mac Pro! I don't want an/another Alienware PC The difference between the two are the video cards. 7900 for Alienware and 7300 for Mac Pro. I'm not sure which one is a better card. Also, the 7500 has SLI, which would be great not just for gaming, but for rendering 3d projects! Any ideas if the Mac Pro would support SLI?

That Mac Pro is beautiful! Someday, I would love to own one after I finish paying off my college loans :(

ravenvii
Aug 7, 2006, 10:04 PM
I was digging on Wikipedia and other sources. I must have missed the part where Microsoft either sold or kept their stocks. I couldn't find hard evidence that they truly sold it. If they own 1/100 of a percent, then they are just keeping a light leash for some corporate reason.


Microsoft sold all of their Apple shares a long time ago.

Yvan256
Aug 7, 2006, 10:07 PM
1. Apple officially announces that Boot Camp will be part of Leopard.
2. VMWare announces their product for OS X.
3. Microsoft kills VPC for Mac as it becomes pointless and sort of redundant.

After all, if they can sell the regular version of Windows to intel Mac users, why bother wasting money on something other companies are doing (VMWare and Parallels).

You want Windows on your Mac, use Boot Camp/buy VMWare or Parallels and then buy Windows like everyone else. No extra R&D funds/time required to enter the "Mac market", which thanks to Boot Camp is "all intel Mac users".

It's a simple business decision.


Yeah, this joke has been around forever. It originally was used when Windows 95 first came out. It isn't technically valid for NT, 2000, XP, 2003, or Vista. Those are just 32-bit (or 64-bit) OSes by a 2 bit company. :-D

Well, how about "Windows Vista: a 64-bit OS that can almost emulate a 32 bit shell running on a 16 bit extension of an 8 bit OS designed for a 4 bit CPU, made by a 2 bit company that can't stand one bit of competition."? ;-)

edenwaith
Aug 7, 2006, 10:21 PM
The writing was on the wall for VPC the moment Apple announced the move to Intel; the only question is why it took so long. (But since when does anything at Microsoft happen quickly?)

Nah, the writing was on the wall the moment Microsoft bought Virtual PC.

berkowit28
Aug 7, 2006, 10:26 PM
The reason MacBU has had to abandon VBA is that the Mac compiler won't work on Intel Macs. And Microsoft has already announced that VBA is being deprecated on Windows (it will go on working for a few years, then will end). So there's no point devoting enormous efforts to making a new compiler only for it all to go away shortly afterwards. There is some reason to believe that eventually VB.NET will work on the Mac as it does on Windows, as a cross-platform solution. Until then, VBA macros need to be translated to AppleScript. There can be no better signal that MacBU is committeed to the Mac than to see the huge investment they have made in AppleScript. Office's AppleScript is already working as of Office 2004, and it mirrors the VBA model identically: macros can be translated to AppleScript _now_, and will then "just work" in the next version of Office too.

mdntcallr
Aug 7, 2006, 10:40 PM
well, maybe Microsoft will sell nicely priced Windows home and pro for packaging with Parrallels and as a coupon with boot camp.

anything is cheaper than the retail price.

shen
Aug 7, 2006, 10:49 PM
take it easy on them, they saved apple's ass in the 90's. if it weren't for them apple would have gone 'rupt. they also have to worry about a thousand different hardware configurations whereas os x 10 has to worry about the mac line.. give 'em a break. (not an ms fanboy) :mad:

yeah!

come to think of it, if it weren't for them and their illegal/immoral practices Apple would be at 90% and linux would be the underdog and there would be no Windows, so....


...errrr, hang on, what?

hulugu
Aug 7, 2006, 11:16 PM
take it easy on them, they saved apple's ass in the 90's. if it weren't for them apple would have gone 'rupt. they also have to worry about a thousand different hardware configurations whereas os x 10 has to worry about the mac line.. give 'em a break. (not an ms fanboy) :mad:

It's my understanding that Microsoft's cash infusion was more symbolic than anything else and helped forge a relationship that included the much more important agreement to continue making Office for the Mac. Furthermore, Microsoft was worried about a DOJ investigation and ensuring that Apple would continue on keep that particular dog quiet.

Microsoft has never done anything out of charity; there's always been profit in the company's actions and they deserve to get thumped a little bit.

That said, the MS programmers have a very difficult problem to solve, much of it created by people who worked on Windows more than a decade ago.

kresh
Aug 8, 2006, 12:11 AM
Originally Posted by Freyqq
Are they working on a universal MS Office?

---------------------------------------------

Yes, but we don't exactly know when that will come out. Look for it AFTER Vista (if that can happen) ;)

I would be willing to bet big money that MS Office Universal Binary is ready to go right this minute.

There is no way Monkey Boy Balmer is going to let the Mac Business Unit release it before Vista and the New Windows' version of Office!

Can you imagine the press release - "Well we are pushing back the release dates of Windows Vista and Office. We want to make sure that it is absolutely perfect. However, we are releasing Microsoft Office Universal Binary for the Apple OS X operating system". It just ain't gonna happen :cool:

IJ Reilly
Aug 8, 2006, 12:18 AM
It's my understanding that Microsoft's cash infusion was more symbolic than anything else and helped forge a relationship that included the much more important agreement to continue making Office for the Mac. Furthermore, Microsoft was worried about a DOJ investigation and ensuring that Apple would continue on keep that particular dog quiet.

Microsoft has never done anything out of charity; there's always been profit in the company's actions and they deserve to get thumped a little bit.

That said, the MS programmers have a very difficult problem to solve, much of it created by people who worked on Windows more than a decade ago.

It was part of a patent lawsuit settlement. Apple had over $1 billion in cash on hand and $7 billion in annual revenue at the time of Microsoft's investment. Microsoft's $150 million didn't save Apple. This is a myth that just refuses to die. In reality, Apple saved Apple -- by changing the way they were doing business.

ocu-master
Aug 8, 2006, 12:40 AM
If I were an MS shareholder, I would be OUTRAGED.

How much did they pay for that? To be fair, I don't recall if MS bought just VPC or all of Connectix, but it hardly matters!

That's got to be a giant pile of shareholder wealth pissed away in a half-assed attempt at being part of (read: smothering) the increasing popularity and utility of Apple.

I would really love to see the numbers on that boondogle.

:rolleyes:


The connectix deal wasn't a 'boondogle' at all - connectix had other products than VPC. MS Virtual Server is based on the code they got from connectix. The server virtualization market is absolutely huge compared to VPC's potential market. I'm sure to Microsoft, VPC was a drop in the bucket in terms of revenue, and if I were a shareholder, I'd be happy as hell that they dropped it.

ginoledesma
Aug 8, 2006, 01:15 AM
Well, this didn't really surprise me, seeing as how MS may have gotten their money's worth already by using the virtualization technology from Connectix in their Windows incarnations.

It was earlier said that MS Office and MS Messenger are the last 2 remaining applications that Microsoft is actively developing for the mac. I don't think Microsoft will drop these anytime soon as the former is a huge cash cow and the latter gives them a user base to compete with Yahoo! and AOL.

Lollypop
Aug 8, 2006, 01:26 AM
The reason MacBU has had to abandon VBA is that the Mac compiler won't work on Intel Macs. And Microsoft has already announced that VBA is being deprecated on Windows (it will go on working for a few years, then will end). So there's no point devoting enormous efforts to making a new compiler only for it all to go away shortly afterwards. There is some reason to believe that eventually VB.NET will work on the Mac as it does on Windows, as a cross-platform solution. Until then, VBA macros need to be translated to AppleScript. There can be no better signal that MacBU is committeed to the Mac than to see the huge investment they have made in AppleScript. Office's AppleScript is already working as of Office 2004, and it mirrors the VBA model identically: macros can be translated to AppleScript _now_, and will then "just work" in the next version of Office too.

I was actually wondering about just this, if MS is going to a new open standard for documents, and apple also does in their own products, wont word be just another nice frontend that performs the same functions as most other apps. Most people, me included, use Office for mac for compatibility, if thats out of the way I wont use office anymore. Will the new open format (ODF I believe) use its own scripting language, or what?

idea_hamster
Aug 8, 2006, 02:05 AM
If I were an MS shareholder, I would be OUTRAGED.

How much did they pay for that? To be fair, I don't recall if MS bought just VPC or all of Connectix, but it hardly matters!

That's got to be a giant pile of shareholder wealth pissed away in a half-assed attempt at being part of (read: smothering) the increasing popularity and utility of Apple.

I would really love to see the numbers on that boondogle.

:rolleyes:
The connectix deal wasn't a 'boondogle' at all - connectix had other products than VPC. MS Virtual Server is based on the code they got from connectix. The server virtualization market is absolutely huge compared to VPC's potential market. I'm sure to Microsoft, VPC was a drop in the bucket in terms of revenue, and if I were a shareholder, I'd be happy as hell that they dropped it.
You're not the only one to point this out:
They got their value out of Connectix in Virtual Server. Like it or not the Mac stuff was just the tip of the iceberg.
So, I'll say that my outrage (which was at best hypothetical) has subsided substantially. :o

Just goes to show what happens when one thinks the world revolves around him-/herself. :rolleyes: I suppose my only exposure to Connectix was with VPC -- turns out my whole experience was some kind of also-ran footnote. Oh, well....

stephenli
Aug 8, 2006, 02:59 AM
Wonder how much they paid Connectix just to abandon it.

dont worry. M$ got what they needed already.
Did someone else remembered XBox 360 Developer Machine is........G5?
while Xbox 360 is powerPC based while Xbox is intel based, they just need Connectix's technology to run old Xbox games on 360....

For M$ does not planned to do a universal version, would they develop VPC for intel mac only? will they still develop VPC for our G5 to run "vista 1.0" a bitttttttttt faster? will they support graphic card in native?

gnasher729
Aug 8, 2006, 03:56 AM
They got their value out of Connectix in Virtual Server. Like it or not the Mac stuff was just the tip of the iceberg.

Also, Microsoft made its money not through Virtual PC, but through the Windows license that you had to buy with it. If you buy Parallels, or use Bootcamp, Microsoft loses a few dollars from the Virtual PC sale, but they still get a big chunk of money for the Windows license. I would say 75% of their revenue and 100% of their profit stay intact.

Will_reed
Aug 8, 2006, 05:08 AM
If theyre gonna kill it they could probably do somthing like I dunno give it away for free? some of us have PPC macs we cant run paralels

rayz
Aug 8, 2006, 06:06 AM
take it easy on them, they saved apple's ass in the 90's. if it weren't for them apple would have gone 'rupt. they also have to worry about a thousand different hardware configurations whereas os x 10 has to worry about the mac line.. give 'em a break. (not an ms fanboy) :mad:

That is not strictly true. The MS purchase of Apple shares was little more than a token gesture to show that MS still believed in the company. It was good publicity for Apple, but it really did fall far short of 'saving their asses'.

glassbathroom
Aug 8, 2006, 06:30 AM
No real surprises here.

Long live Parallels.

janstett
Aug 8, 2006, 06:58 AM
Anyone else remember those old rumors about how MS was buying VPC just to kill it off? I thought that was silly back then, but I'm wondering now. Considering how they sat on the thing for ages and never really did anything with it and now have caved at the first sign of competition, you have to wonder. They clearly were not very committed to keeping it going.

Not true, you just have to change your perspective. MS isn't interested in Virtual PC as a consumer product, as useful as it is; VPC as a power user tool is a well kept secret. They always had their eye on it for use in virtual servers. That's why it's going to be built into Vista Server and they are pushing it now as "Virtual Server 2005".

Sad to see Virtual PC go, both on the Mac and on the PC too (I run Red Hat on my Dell via VPC, very handy). Thank God a product like Parallels came along, and also that it also exists on the PC... I will have to make new virtual machines of my favorite operating systems one more time, but I do have to say Parallels is better than VPC.

jagolden
Aug 8, 2006, 07:39 AM
... Who needs their crappy software anyway?
I do! I need entourage, xcel and Word, PERIOD. It's not so much a matter of choice as fitting in with the rest of my company. Mac users used to exist in a bubble, but no for many years now. They must also fit in with corporate.

When some little known Russian software company can do in months what Micrsoft can't do in years it's obvious where this is going.
Going out on limb here but frankly do not have much trust for software from Russia or its nieghbors. Being so far out of the normal picture, who knows what sort of backdoor code these seemingly legit companies from there are putting in. Sounds partanoid, sure, but...

VMWare will come out with a better virtualization technology and Windows will continue to become irrelevant. iWork needs a spreadsheet and you'll be hard pressed to find a reason to run anything Microsoft on your mac.
Only if an iWork spreadsheet is going to open EXACTLY as created in Excel and have all the capabilities of Excel.

I said it before on these posts and got laughed to scorn, Microsoft is dead. Everyone knows it. Even die hard Windows fanboys are starting to have doubts. Vista will fail miserably and the company will be broken up. Why anyone would use something second rate, more expensive, less secure, and of inferior quality in the light of such a polished and mature operating system is beyond comprehension.
Please. Dead? Not by a long shot. Hurting? Emarassed? Oh yeah. But as long as they don't realise they are dead they'll still be a power to be reconed with.

Thataboy
Aug 8, 2006, 07:48 AM
The reason MacBU has had to abandon VBA is that the Mac compiler won't work on Intel Macs. And Microsoft has already announced that VBA is being deprecated on Windows (it will go on working for a few years, then will end). So there's no point devoting enormous efforts to making a new compiler only for it all to go away shortly afterwards. There is some reason to believe that eventually VB.NET will work on the Mac as it does on Windows, as a cross-platform solution. Until then, VBA macros need to be translated to AppleScript. There can be no better signal that MacBU is committeed to the Mac than to see the huge investment they have made in AppleScript. Office's AppleScript is already working as of Office 2004, and it mirrors the VBA model identically: macros can be translated to AppleScript _now_, and will then "just work" in the next version of Office too.

Interesting information.

So Office 2004 AppleScript can translate VB on the fly (and 2007 VB can translate AppleScript), or that's the goal and we aren't there yet?

If they can keep the scripting compatible, then I can definitely see a plus in dropping VB for Mac Office.

dernhelm
Aug 8, 2006, 07:56 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Microsoft has announced that it has halted development on a universal version of VirtualPC.

Microsoft has claimed that to port VirtualPC to Intel would be much like making VirtualPC 1.0 all over again.



Funny how the folks at EMC (VMWare) didn't seem to think so...

Whistleway
Aug 8, 2006, 08:05 AM
apple made a strategic mistake of not buying parallels. it is gonna hurt them in the long run. steve is too old fashioned and dragging the company down. it is a great product. :(

whatever
Aug 8, 2006, 09:01 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Microsoft has announced that it has halted development on a universal version of VirtualPC.

Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Microsoft_Officially_Kills_Virtual_PC)
I used to use VirtualPC mainly to take screenshots for various Flash tutorials and demos that I created. Then one day I was in a rush and I took all of my screenshots using Safari and boy did people notice. The couldn't believe how much clearer the screens were and then one of my friends came forwarded and pointed out that most screenshots we see are taken from Macs in the first place.
I soon stopped relying on VPC more and more. My IT department upgraded our e-mail servers so that I use either Mail or Entourage to see my e-mail and slowly I stopped using it completely.
Back when the G5's came out, I could upgrade my machine because there was no support for VPC on a G5 (that changed eventually), but the thought of not being able to run VPC on Mac Pro has never crossed my mind.
The need for VPC in the Mac/Intel age is gone and Microsoft is wise to move on.
Perhaps they're doing this because they can now eaisly create and port native Mac OS apps.

Whatever

berkowit28
Aug 8, 2006, 09:20 AM
So Office 2004 AppleScript can translate VB on the fly (and 2007 VB can translate AppleScript), or that's the goal and we aren't there yet?



Unfortunately, no. It needs someone (an AppleScripter who knows VBA) to do the translating. But time will tell if some of this can be done instead in the XML, which would be cross-platform for the new files.

F14CRAZY
Aug 8, 2006, 09:25 AM
Connectix was pretty sweet. I guess their legacy is dead, except for those priceless Ram Double floppies I have stashed away for a different day and age.

davegoody
Aug 8, 2006, 09:43 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Microsoft has announced that it has halted development on a universal version of VirtualPC.



VirtualPC has long-been the king of the hill for Virtualization on Macintosh. With the Intel transition, however, came competitive pressure from Parallels (http://www.parallels.com/en/products/desktop/), which has since released the final version of its product, and VMWare which is showcasing a beta (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060805151513.shtml) of its solution at WWDC.

Microsoft has claimed that to port VirtualPC to Intel would be much like making VirtualPC 1.0 all over again.



Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Microsoft_Officially_Kills_Virtual_PC)

As a Powerbook G4 User, VPC was all of unusable, really slow. I know that it has (had ?) to emulate an entire Hardware platform, but knowing how much bloatware M$ produce, I am sure it could have been a hell of a lot faster if it was coded better. I know that M$ purchased this software from Connectix, but successive versions gained features and lost speed !

eme jota ce
Aug 8, 2006, 09:58 AM
good, that was hard to use anyway...

Never worked well for me either.

Maybe the makers of parallels could focus on a Microsoft Office replacement, too.

SiliconAddict
Aug 8, 2006, 10:23 AM
apple made a strategic mistake of not buying parallels. it is gonna hurt them in the long run. steve is too old fashioned and dragging the company down. it is a great product. :(

:rolleyes:

As I've had to mention before. How so? There are more Windows on Mac solutions now then ever before. Apple doesn't need to do crap. The biggest barrier in the past was the PPC chip. With that out of the way the gates are open to let companies like VMWare do there thang.

IJ Reilly
Aug 8, 2006, 10:31 AM
That is not strictly true. The MS purchase of Apple shares was little more than a token gesture to show that MS still believed in the company.

Not really. Microsoft had no reason to show that they "believed" in Apple. The investment was a condition of legal settlement. See post #98.

Passante
Aug 8, 2006, 11:21 AM
I guess MS realized that there would be no more PPC Macs in existence by the time they finally released Virtual PC. :D

50548
Aug 8, 2006, 12:09 PM
This is just another nail in MS's coffin...they are a zombie walking to nowhere right now, and they have no idea where to go in terms of overall corporate strategy.

The sole MS product currently needed in Macs is Office; and by the time the agreement vanishes, we'll surely have more than 2 GREAT productivity suite choices. MS shot itself in the foot when it accepted an open XML format...from then on they have nothing strictly proprietary to tie users up.

As for Vista, it's just a dead dog now. Most of its originally advertised features have been stripped away, and most serious users aren't even considering an upgrade.

MS is close to becoming a gaming rig company, and I couldn't care less.

GO APPLE!

shelterpaw
Aug 8, 2006, 12:18 PM
I find it quite amusing that so many people think MS is doomed. Especially since they are killing VPC. I don't think it was or ever will be a big revenue maker for MS, so it probably cost them more to keep it around then to shelve it.

I certainly think it would be great to see them lose about 40% of their desktop market share to OS X and Linux, but if that ever happens, it wont be a long time to come. All this MS is doomed and has messed up crap is nuts. Funny, but nuts.

50548
Aug 8, 2006, 12:48 PM
I find it quite amusing that so many people think MS is doomed. Especially since they are killing VPC. I don't think it was or ever will be a big revenue maker for MS, so it probably cost them more to keep it around then to shelve it.

I certainly think it would be great to see them lose about 40% of their desktop market share to OS X and Linux, but if that ever happens, it wont be a long time to come. All this MS is doomed and has messed up crap is nuts. Funny, but nuts.

Mr. Gates has already dropped the ball; I just hope Monkey Ballmer stays long enough to finish his bad job at MS...we would be all grateful.

shelterpaw
Aug 8, 2006, 12:53 PM
Monkey BallmerHe's much too big to be a monkey. More like a gorilla. Maybe call him Gorilla B.

Plus he likes to throw chairs around and gorilla's like to throw poop around, so I can see the crossover. Poop slinging Gorilla B.

MacSedgley
Aug 8, 2006, 01:29 PM
Next step: Microsoft announces they've acquired Parallels, Inc.

Good point - however, a 'top secret' virtual machine inside leopard would mean they have wasted their money.

Does anyone really give a toss about Virtual PC being dead? It was pretty crap anyway.

mcarnes
Aug 8, 2006, 01:50 PM
Does anyone really give a toss about Virtual PC being dead? It was pretty crap anyway.

I don't. It's just one less MS product I have to buy. I'm glad to see it go.

nsjoker
Aug 8, 2006, 02:02 PM
this is good for both microsoft and apple.

morespce54
Aug 8, 2006, 02:08 PM
Let's face it, Microsoft can't compete. iWork needs a spreadsheet and you'll be hard pressed to find a reason to run anything Microsoft on your mac.


Well, let's say you are working on a Mac (bless you) and all your co-workers are using a PC. Suddenly, you have to work on the same documents (like a .doc, a .ppt or a .xls) Call it "incompatibility"...

I don't like MS but a lot of peoples (over 90%) still do... :rolleyes:

ravenvii
Aug 8, 2006, 02:15 PM
Well, let's say you are working on a Mac (bless you) and all your co-workers are using a PC. Suddenly, you have to work on the same documents (like a .doc, a .ppt or a .xls) Call it "incompatibility"...

I don't like MS but a lot of peoples (over 90%) still do... :rolleyes:

Well, Pages can open and edit and save .doc files, and Keynote can do the same with .ppt files.

But formatting and the such can be an issue. NeoOffice/OpenOffice handles .doc and .ppt formatting better, from what I hear. I've never used OpenOffice extensively, so I wouldn't know.

jagolden
Aug 8, 2006, 02:33 PM
Well, Pages can open and edit and save .doc files, and Keynote can do the same with .ppt files.

But formatting and the such can be an issue. NeoOffice/OpenOffice handles .doc and .ppt formatting better, from what I hear. I've never used OpenOffice extensively, so I wouldn't know.

But see, that's just it. If we're working back and forth on .docs and .xls's, we can't have ANY formating problems - they've got to match. AND I'm not going to jump through any hoops by using this or that piece of software to make it happen. Don't have time - gotta produce!

jagolden
Aug 8, 2006, 02:37 PM
Connectix was pretty sweet. I guess their legacy is dead, except for those priceless Ram Double floppies I have stashed away for a different day and age.

Ah! Ram Doubler and Speed Doubler - those were great - worked too!
I remember those days.
Therewas also a piece of software to emulate a floating point processor for those machines that didn't have one.

Remember shoe-horning into my SE a video card so I could attach a 21" monitor - yay RasterOps!

ravenvii
Aug 8, 2006, 02:41 PM
But see, that's just it. If we're working back and forth on .docs and .xls's, we can't have ANY formating problems - they've got to match. AND I'm not going to jump through any hoops by using this or that piece of software to make it happen. Don't have time - gotta produce!

Well, MS Office is a piece of software, so you kind of still have to "use this or that piece of software". If you find NeoOffice/OpenOffice (they're the same thing - NeoOffice is java-based, and OpenOffice uses X11. The only difference is that NeoOffice is a little behind on versions) handles formatting fine, then use it, and you won't have problems.

And guess what, they're both free. So why don't you go and try them out. Who knows, they might surprise you.

oyam5000
Aug 8, 2006, 02:57 PM
[QUOTE=Cameront9]So with WMP gone and now VPC gone, the only MAJOR software developed for Macs by Microsoft is Office?
QUOTE]

WMP may be killed but Microsoft made Flip4Mac™ which plays .wma and .wmv useing quick time. It works fine.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/player/wmcomponents.mspx

By the way you can still download WMP here.
http://www.microsoft.com/mac/downloads.aspx?pid=download&location=/mac/download/misc/winmp_osx.xml&secid=80&ssid=8&flgnosysreq=True

Westside guy
Aug 8, 2006, 04:46 PM
Funny how the folks at EMC (VMWare) didn't seem to think so...

Well, I'd think there are a couple important distinctions. VMware's product will almost certainly be for Intel Macs only, so it's not going to be universal. Also, while MS has in-house expertise already on developing VPC on x86... those people aren't in the MacBU. Occasionally MS will "lend" people from one division to another, but it only seems to happen when the company as a whole sees the end result as being critical to MS's future (e.g. the XBox folks being shifted over to Zune).

I don't particularly like Microsoft, but I don't think they've been going out of their way to hurt Apple lately. Business is business. When there's a good business case for maintaining a product - such as Office - they continue to do so. If at some point the MacBU is not a moneymaker, it will go away.

Mr Maui
Aug 8, 2006, 05:10 PM
I guess there was no reason to continue. They were prob not making much of a profit on VPC anyhow and 3rd parties already had it covered.

Are they working on a universal MS Office?
I think MS is just plain PO'd at Apple and Steve Jobs right now. :)

Cameront9
Aug 8, 2006, 05:27 PM
[QUOTE=Cameront9]So with WMP gone and now VPC gone, the only MAJOR software developed for Macs by Microsoft is Office?
QUOTE]

WMP may be killed but Microsoft made Flip4Mac™ which plays .wma and .wmv useing quick time. It works fine.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/player/wmcomponents.mspx

By the way you can still download WMP here.
http://www.microsoft.com/mac/downloads.aspx?pid=download&location=/mac/download/misc/winmp_osx.xml&secid=80&ssid=8&flgnosysreq=True


Ah, but MS didn't develop Flip4Mac. As far as I know, they didn't even buy it. They just worked out a deal to distribute it.

macenforcer
Aug 8, 2006, 05:30 PM
Wonder how much they paid Connectix just to abandon it.



Gazillions and boy did connectix make a smart move.

Compufix
Aug 9, 2006, 10:24 AM
Ah! Ram Doubler and Speed Doubler - those were great - worked too!
I remember those days.
Therewas also a piece of software to emulate a floating point processor for those machines that didn't have one.

Remember shoe-horning into my SE a video card so I could attach a 21" monitor - yay RasterOps!

And don't forget about my favorite program from them.....The Playstation Emulator that worked almost 100% perfectly...but does not run on OSX or Classic, had to run in OS9 proper. I loved that program......sigh....

Compufix
Aug 9, 2006, 10:28 AM
Well, MS Office is a piece of software, so you kind of still have to "use this or that piece of software". If you find NeoOffice/OpenOffice (they're the same thing - NeoOffice is java-based, and OpenOffice uses X11. The only difference is that NeoOffice is a little behind on versions) handles formatting fine, then use it, and you won't have problems.

And guess what, they're both free. So why don't you go and try them out. Who knows, they might surprise you.

BTW all, dont forget Codeweavers and the other project "Cider" by another company. I can currently run Office 2003 (Outlook is the only one that complains) currently on an MBP without Windows at all 8-)....and if CIDER appears to be what it is, more and more Windows type programs can offer a wrapped version that will run naitively on Intel OSX.....say what you want...but as more and more options like this become available....Windows as an OS will just not be as important anymore....

-Compufix

pubwvj
Aug 9, 2006, 10:37 AM
When MS bought vPC I figured that was the beginning of the end. They have a history of destroying great Mac products.

BackInTheSaddle
Aug 9, 2006, 11:03 AM
I'm so happy I sold my copy of VPC on eBay a couple weeks ago :D

I've been using Parallels with Win XP for a brief time, but it already appears to be far more stable and responsive than VPC ever was, even under Classic (it really had problems moving to OS X). I really don't blame Microsoft though for killing it, the product was inherently inferior to the latest offerings on the market, with little to no chance of ever catching up.

berkowit28
Aug 9, 2006, 08:06 PM
Two MacBU developers have posted very interesting comments on their blogs:

http://www.schwieb.com/blog/2006/08/08/saying-goodbye-to-visual-basic/

http://blogs.msdn.com/rick_schaut/archive/2006/08/09/693499.aspx

MacAficionado
Aug 9, 2006, 08:49 PM
Microsoft SUCKS.

It is not like we did not know this.

Vista, and every other OS they have made SUCKS. They copy and follow. They do not lead, they are pathetic. They suck so much, I can't put it into words. They dominated because of their policies and because of Apple. The are bad and Jesus, they are going to suck for a lot longer. remember, Ballmer is the King of Innovation now at MS.

Enough said

Lollypop
Aug 10, 2006, 12:34 AM
But see, that's just it. If we're working back and forth on .docs and .xls's, we can't have ANY formating problems - they've got to match. AND I'm not going to jump through any hoops by using this or that piece of software to make it happen. Don't have time - gotta produce!

When we first started to look into macs for our company the very first thing people wanted to know was how would documents look and be saved. ITs nice to say that openoffice is close, but close isnt a match. Im hoping the new ODF (open document format) will solve these problems! :D

Bobdude161
Aug 10, 2006, 02:44 AM
Does that mean that VirtualPC is now abandonware and can be distributed freely?

steve_hill4
Aug 10, 2006, 04:18 AM
Does that mean that VirtualPC is now abandonware and can be distributed freely?
Doubt it. This is Microsoft remember. Also, I think it is still going to get sold for PPC, it's just they no longer plan a Intel/Universal build of it.

Give it up to when it is no longer available to buy for PPC then it becomes abandonware I believe.

demallien
Aug 10, 2006, 06:31 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Microsoft has claimed that to port VirtualPC to Intel would be much like making VirtualPC 1.0 all over again.



That sounds like a load of rubbish to me. They have VirtualPC for PC, so the actual "virtualisation" part could be taken from there. They also know how to use the various hooks in MacOSX, because that's what VPC7 for mac uses.

Which is not to say that it would be an easy task, but let's say that 50% of the work was already done. This seems like a reasonable estimate to me, and would be backed up by the time it has taken VMWare to create their Intel Mac version of their PC software....

I'm not normally one for conspiracy theory, but with Microsoft dropping WMP, IE, VirtualPC, and reducing 100% support for Office on the Mac, all in the last 12 months, I would suggest that Redmond is starting to get a little worried about Apple for the first time since the 1980s