Real Pc -- New Informations !

[macmunch]

They show an interview with FWB (in english)
about the incredible features and speed of REAL PC

LOOK !

http://www.macbidouille.com/article.php?id=112&page=3


:D

[bousozoku]

It sounds good. Their original emulator was first but inordinately slow so I hope they can come up with something better, especially since it's no longer SoftWindows.

[iJon]

well if they make it what they are saying it would be it looks like mac users without a pc have something to look forward too, sounds very exciting. and knowing its a couple of weeks away make this better.

iJon

[Thanatoast]

That is totally sweet! If they produce anything close to what they promise (I know, I know) then there will be much rejoicing in the mac world. I would love to see a product that is developed for PC gaming on a mac. It would be one of the few items on my "must buy" list.

[mac15]

sweet, I have a 32mb card, so PC games should be sweet!

I hope they can atleast do something at half the speed of this, that would be incredible

[BaghdadBob]

Maybe Apple will make their 64-bit processor half PPC and half Intel/AMD command set? That...would be awesome...and totally unlikely...and someone more technically advanced than I am will probably tell me why it would be totally impossible. Oh well.

It was a half-baked idea anyway.:rolleyes:

[Sauron1440]

Boy, that bit about "programming for games" and the words "radeon 9700" really made my day better...

I think I'll go post this on IMG, if no one beats me to it.

[Mr. MacPhisto]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Maybe Apple will make their 64-bit processor half PPC and half Intel/AMD command set? That...would be awesome...and totally unlikely...and someone more technically advanced than I am will probably tell me why it would be totally impossible. Oh well.

It was a half-baked idea anyway.:rolleyes:

The 970 has already been designed and won't be that way. It would be insane to make a chip like that anyways - and it would end up being incompatible with PCs and PPCs because it wouldn't have the command set. It's best to pick a horse and ride it.

[Brandon Sharitt]

I was wondering whether to get a new Mac or a new PC for gaming. It looks like I can get the Mac and still play games. Ithink it's great that they are using a Unix based version, not a Carbonized version, that should make it much faster than VirtualPC. I don't think the interviewer knew what he was talking about at the end when he said the low level nature of it could make the OS unstable. Maybe on Windows 95 or the old Mac OS, but not on a modern OS.

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by Brandon Sharitt
I was wondering whether to get a new Mac or a new PC for gaming. It looks like I can get the Mac and still play games. Ithink it's great that they are using a Unix based version, not a Carbonized version, that should make it much faster than VirtualPC. I don't think the interviewer knew what he was talking about at the end when he said the low level nature of it could make the OS unstable. Maybe on Windows 95 or the old Mac OS, but not on a modern OS.

I'm with iJon here. If I were solely interested in gaming and had no morals I would buy a PC in a heartbeat. All Apple loyalists will agree with me on the following points because we've lived through the agony for too long:

A: It's cheaper to buy, "pound for pound." For the money you would spend on a top of the line G4 you could have a PC with far more power and a sweet monitor to boot.

B: It's cheaper to upgrade. Hopefully this will go away, but currently I know of no way to do a complete upgrade of a mac in the way you can with a PC (for, once again, a fraction of the cost).

C: PC game developers largely ignore the Mac market because it is too small (like 3%, down from ten what seems like an eternity ago). BUNGIE was one of the only companies that was faithful to the Mac market, and guess what? Microsoft bought them. Activision ignored Mac users with Hexen II, even though the engine (Quake II, I believe) was already developed for the Mac and they had a minimal amount of work to do to port it. The vast majority of games, and software, are never ported to the mac. But take solace -- most games and software are crap anyway.

Generally, Mac users only get the cream when it comes to games because it just isn't worth the time to develop a bad game for a small market. However, most of these, when they are ports, take months to move over. And then you have the issue of not being able to keep up with the speed required to run games if your computer is too old, and you need to blow another 3k on a new CPU to be "up-to-date." Running an emulator won't solve this problem.

But here's my own personal feeling on the subject: I won't support Microsoft.

I own a PS2 and a GC, but no XBOX. I don't care what comes out on it.

I will continue to struggle along, buying a new computer every three years as I can afford it (hopefully I can stop working crappy jobs and this changes) and watch all the good computer games go by.

I will do this, because, despite my love/hate relationship with Apple, I have been a Mac user since '86. I have been forced to use PCs, and I hate them. I mean that. I also hate Microsoft. I mean that too. Apple is a company that needs to be supported, much like your favorite bands, because if the money goes away, the music won't be heard. And, in my own little fantasy world, I believe that one day I will not be laughed at by ignorant PC clones.

Thank you, that is all.

[Nermal]

FWB's website says they're expecting to start shipping the new version on 1 June (or it could be 6 January, I never know with the American date system :p)

[Sol]

The new Real PC sounds better every time I read something new about it. It was a pleasant surprise to read that they are writing it with games performance in mind and that the same Radeon 9700 could be used by both OS X and Real PC at the same time. I imagine that Real PC would take over the whole screen so that Direct X could control the card. Anyway, if this product works as well as it sounds then Apple should definitely buy it from FWB and include an x86 layer Classic-style in OS X.3

[iJon]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
I'm with iJon here. If I were solely interested in gaming and had no morals I would buy a PC in a heartbeat. All Apple loyalists will agree with me on the following points because we've lived through the agony for too long:

A: It's cheaper to buy, "pound for pound." For the money you would spend on a top of the line G4 you could have a PC with far more power and a sweet monitor to boot.

B: It's cheaper to upgrade. Hopefully this will go away, but currently I know of no way to do a complete upgrade of a mac in the way you can with a PC (for, once again, a fraction of the cost).

C: PC game developers largely ignore the Mac market because it is too small (like 3%, down from ten what seems like an eternity ago). BUNGIE was one of the only companies that was faithful to the Mac market, and guess what? Microsoft bought them. Activision ignored Mac users with Hexen II, even though the engine (Quake II, I believe) was already developed for the Mac and they had a minimal amount of work to do to port it. The vast majority of games, and software, are never ported to the mac. But take solace -- most games and software are crap anyway.

Generally, Mac users only get the cream when it comes to games because it just isn't worth the time to develop a bad game for a small market. However, most of these, when they are ports, take months to move over. And then you have the issue of not being able to keep up with the speed required to run games if your computer is too old, and you need to blow another 3k on a new CPU to be "up-to-date." Running an emulator won't solve this problem.

But here's my own personal feeling on the subject: I won't support Microsoft.

I own a PS2 and a GC, but no XBOX. I don't care what comes out on it.

I will continue to struggle along, buying a new computer every three years as I can afford it (hopefully I can stop working crappy jobs and this changes) and watch all the good computer games go by.

I will do this, because, despite my love/hate relationship with Apple, I have been a Mac user since '86. I have been forced to use PCs, and I hate them. I mean that. I also hate Microsoft. I mean that too. Apple is a company that needs to be supported, much like your favorite bands, because if the money goes away, the music won't be heard. And, in my own little fantasy world, I believe that one day I will not be laughed at by ignorant PC clones.

Thank you, that is all.
well i pretty much agree with you, besides the microsoft stuff, if you get a console xbox is a great machine, really ahead of everyone else, but i will keep it on the topic, if you really want a mac and want to play games, get a mac and a console, if the games you want arent for console, go build a pc, thats what i did and i love it. you pretty much cant put mac and game in the same sentence, unless its macs dont have any games. and anyone who tells you its an old myth and crap about games on the mac and they say it isnt true.... they are in denial.

iJon

[Sol]

Originally posted by iJon
well i pretty much agree with you, besides the microsoft stuff, if you get a console xbox is a great machine, really ahead of everyone else, but i will keep it on the topic, if you really want a mac and want to play games, get a mac and a console, if the games you want arent for console, go build a pc, thats what i did and i love it. you pretty much cant put mac and game in the same sentence, unless its macs dont have any games. and anyone who tells you its an old myth and crap about games on the mac and they say it isnt true.... they are in denial.

iJon

I think that you are exaggerating when you say that publishers ignore the Mac and that there are no games for it. While OS X does not have the catalogue of a console or a Windows it does have a steady stream of new releases. Playing online games is a lot more practical on a Mac than on any of the next-gen consoles. Open GL is an integral part of OS X and the majority of Mac games have hardware acceleration. Just because OS X does not have the quantity of games released on Windows does not mean that none are there. Remember that it is the quality that matters and titles such as Black & White, F1 CS 2000 and Aliens Vs Predator (my own collection) are proof of the general quality of Mac games.

[macdong]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Activision ignored Mac users with Hexen II, even though the engine (Quake II, I believe) was already developed for the Mac and they had a minimal amount of work to do to port it.

So they do. Too bad. My money ain't gonna be in their pockets.

[iJon]

Originally posted by Sol
I think that you are exaggerating when you say that publishers ignore the Mac and that there are no games for it. While OS X does not have the catalogue of a console or a Windows it does have a steady stream of new releases. Playing online games is a lot more practical on a Mac than on any of the next-gen consoles. Open GL is an integral part of OS X and the majority of Mac games have hardware acceleration. Just because OS X does not have the quantity of games released on Windows does not mean that none are there. Remember that it is the quality that matters and titles such as Black & White, F1 CS 2000 and Aliens Vs Predator (my own collection) are proof of the general quality of Mac games.
well ok, your games are fun(i guess). this is why i asked what games he played, this can play both ways. these have been voted top 10 action games of of 2002(they had many categories, i picked action for the hell of it) the only game we have gotten out of that list isnt even out yet.

iJon

No One Lives Forever 2: A Spy in H.A.R.M.'s Way

Grand Theft Auto III

Mafia

Battlefield 1942: The Road to Rome

Battlefield 1942

Unreal Tournament 2003

Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell

Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six 3: Raven Shield

Hitman 2: Silent Assassin

America's Army: Operations

[saint.duo]

Excuse me? I'm looking at quite a full shelf of mac games.
SOF2, Ghost Recon, Warcraft III, etc etc.
There are mac games, just not as many as the PCs. We don't get the "fly by night" PC games, or stuff like hitman and GTA3.
I have a G4, PS2, and PC (for the afformentioned games).

On topic, I hope the OS X RealPC blows VPC out of the water.

[macdong]

Originally posted by Sol
I think that you are exaggerating when you say that publishers ignore the Mac and that there are no games for it. While OS X does not have the catalogue of a console or a Windows it does have a steady stream of new releases. Playing online games is a lot more practical on a Mac than on any of the next-gen consoles. Open GL is an integral part of OS X and the majority of Mac games have hardware acceleration. Just because OS X does not have the quantity of games released on Windows does not mean that none are there. Remember that it is the quality that matters and titles such as Black & White, F1 CS 2000 and Aliens Vs Predator (my own collection) are proof of the general quality of Mac games.


Like BaghdadBob said, it isn't worth the time to develop a bad game for a small market. So most games that got ported or original developed (is there any??) for Mac are good games.

[inish]

Originally posted by Brandon Sharitt
I was wondering whether to get a new Mac or a new PC for gaming. It looks like I can get the Mac and still play games. Ithink it's great that they are using a Unix based version, not a Carbonized version, that should make it much faster than VirtualPC. I don't think the interviewer knew what he was talking about at the end when he said the low level nature of it could make the OS unstable. Maybe on Windows 95 or the old Mac OS, but not on a modern OS.




I would get a PC for GAMING......there just more highly equipped for gaming.

iNish

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by iJon
well i pretty much agree with you, besides the microsoft stuff, if you get a console xbox is a great machine, really ahead of everyone else, but i will keep it on the topic,

Actually, the Xbox was behind everyone else, which is why it was faster when it was released ;)

if you really want a mac and want to play games, get a mac and a console, if the games you want arent for console, go build a pc, thats what i did and i love it. you pretty much cant put mac and game in the same sentence, unless its macs dont have any games. and anyone who tells you its an old myth and crap about games on the mac and they say it isnt true.... they are in denial.

iJon

Yes, well, as I said, only the cream tends to come to the Mac. As has been said in the previous replies, quality is what matters.

And Activision isn't getting my money either. Unless they are under new management...kinda like France.

But I stand by what I said about Microsoft. I won't buy or use their products when I can help it, not at all, irregardless of quality, because they are only serving to squash all the fine, creative, but too small developers out there. They poison every company that gets in bed with them, and they will buy out anything that gets in their way. I especially won't buy their console because I like Sony and Nintendo, and I don't want to support the undercutting of more great products.

Anyway...this is getting way off topic.

A PC emulator better have really good graphics card usage or it will still be useless to gamers (I guess that's why everyone's so excited about this article). Sorry to get on my soapbox.

[iJon]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Actually, the Xbox was behind everyone else, which is why it was faster when it was released ;)
and that is exactly why the xbox is better spec wise, but i dont want to argue, i have a ps2 too. they are all great, just gotta pick what games you want. i want to keep this on the pc mac game topic.

iJon

[bousozoku]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Maybe Apple will make their 64-bit processor half PPC and half Intel/AMD command set? That...would be awesome...and totally unlikely...and someone more technically advanced than I am will probably tell me why it would be totally impossible. Oh well.

It was a half-baked idea anyway.:rolleyes:

That was already done years ago with the PPC 615 processor which did x86 instructions along with PPC instructions. It died an ugly death.

[MrMacMan]

:deletes order for VPC6:

Hell yes, real video support, shweet!!!!

Well M$ has a monopoly on many things one being gaming. This is what I would buy this for, am I expecting my machine to run C&C Generals or something even more graphical intense?
Heck no!
But do I want some older, classic games that people play, hell yes.

[Malus120]

Originally posted by iJon
well i pretty much agree with you, besides the microsoft stuff, if you get a console xbox is a great machine, really ahead of everyone else, but i will keep it on the topic, if you really want a mac and want to play games, get a mac and a console, if the games you want arent for console, go build a pc, thats what i did and i love it. you pretty much cant put mac and game in the same sentence, unless its macs dont have any games. and anyone who tells you its an old myth and crap about games on the mac and they say it isnt true.... they are in denial.

iJon

Hah hah Xbox "really ahead of everyone else". Yeah right. The ONLY way Xbox has any real lead at all over any of the consoles is in PURE hardware power, and as anyone who's been in the console market for 5 or more years can tell you its not power that wins the console wars, but game quality. As things stand right now the Xbox has a few good games(especially if your into shooters and PC Ports), and even some uniqe ones(DOAXVB, Panzer Dragoon,ect),but it just cant compare(IMO) to the large number of quality games on PS2 or even GameCube. Sorry just couldnt let that point sit unchallanged :D

Oh and just so we dont go totally off topic im REEEEEEEALY exicted about the possibilities of RealPC. Just Imagine a PC emulator that can run at decent speeds and emulates Video cards up to the Radeon 9700. This thing is gonna kick so much ass especially when paired with a PPC 970 :D

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by saint.duo
On topic, I hope the OS X RealPC blows VPC out of the water.

Dang skippy! I will miss Connectix, they served us all well. An excellent company in its day.

[awulf]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob

I'm with iJon here. If I were solely interested in gaming and had no morals I would buy a PC in a heartbeat. All Apple loyalists will agree with me on the following points because we've lived through the agony for too long:

A: It's cheaper to buy, "pound for pound." For the money you would spend on a top of the line G4 you could have a PC with far more power and a sweet monitor to boot.

In the log run macs are cheaper, it has been proven (there is an article somewhere) plus Mac's come with way more features and Apple gives away I apps.



B: It's cheaper to upgrade. Hopefully this will go away, but currently I know of no way to do a complete upgrade of a mac in the way you can with a PC (for, once again, a fraction of the cost).


PowerMac's are highly upgradable, the only thing that would be expensive to upgrade is the CPU (which a PC can't upgrade as far as a Mac can, i.e. my PM7600/132 can be upgraded to a G4), other than that you can use what ever brand of memory, hard disks and CD-ROM/RW drives.



C: PC game developers largely ignore the Mac market because it is too small (like 3%, down from ten what seems like an eternity ago). BUNGIE was one of the only companies that was faithful to the Mac market, and guess what? Microsoft bought them. Activision ignored Mac users with Hexen II, even though the engine (Quake II, I believe) was already developed for the Mac and they had a minimal amount of work to do to port it. The vast majority of games, and software, are never ported to the mac. But take solace -- most games and software are crap anyway.


Yep there aren't many games on the mac, but enough for me.



Generally, Mac users only get the cream when it comes to games because it just isn't worth the time to develop a bad game for a small market. However, most of these, when they are ports, take months to move over. And then you have the issue of not being able to keep up with the speed required to run games if your computer is too old, and you need to blow another 3k on a new CPU to be "up-to-date." Running an emulator won't solve this problem.


Get a cheaper CPU upgrade



But here's my own personal feeling on the subject: I won't support Microsoft.

I own a PS2 and a GC, but no XBOX. I don't care what comes out on it.


Actually it would be best if everyone bought an xBox and not to buy any games for it, because MS makes a loss on each one.



I will continue to struggle along, buying a new computer every three years as I can afford it (hopefully I can stop working crappy jobs and this changes) and watch all the good computer games go by.

I will do this, because, despite my love/hate relationship with Apple, I have been a Mac user since '86. I have been forced to use PCs, and I hate them. I mean that. I also hate Microsoft. I mean that too. Apple is a company that needs to be supported, much like your favourite bands, because if the money goes away, the music won't be heard. And, in my own little fantasy world, I believe that one day I will not be laughed at by ignorant PC clones.

Thank you, that is all.

[Malus120]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Dang skippy! I will miss Connectix, they served us all well. An excellent company in its day.
Oh **** another one i gotta aruge. Personally I almost hate Connectix for what they did to poor Virtual Game Station(a playstation Emu and one of the best products to come out of that ****ty company), some of the really stupid decisions they made with VPC(slow, dropping/not improving vid card support),ect.
With VGS they made some of the worst customer support/customer relations decisions ever. When the court ordered them(at Sony's request) to temporarily stop selling(NOT stop supporting as far as i know) VGS while they reviewed the facts or whatever they NEVER ONCE updated VGS during this period and by the time the order was FINNALY lifted they released a Windows V 1.3 and left the mac at 1.2(of course they rectified this later by giving us 1.4 first but still) when an update to 1.2 had been in desperate need for months(many newer games were having problems). Then after another year or so they just sold out to Sony and even though they SAID they would continue to support thier customers until VGS went completely to sony(scheduled at the time for 6-12 months later cant remember) they never released a single update beyond 1.4.1(which had been released a good while ago) No OS X version no version to work in classic not even a 1.5 WHAT A WASTE!!!!!

[iJon]

Originally posted by Malus120
Oh **** another one i gotta aruge. Personally I almost hate Connectix for what they did to poor Virtual Game Station(a playstation Emu and one of the best products to come out of that ****ty company), some of the really stupid decisions they made with VPC(slow, dropping/not improving vid card support),ect.
With VGS they made some of the worst customer support/customer relations decisions ever. When the court ordered them(at Sony's request) to temporarily stop selling(NOT stop supporting as far as i know) VGS while they reviewed the facts or whatever they NEVER ONCE updated VGS during this period and by the time the order was FINNALY lifted they released a Windows V 1.3 and left the mac at 1.2(of course they rectified this later by giving us 1.4 first but still) when an update to 1.2 had been in desperate need for months(many newer games were having problems). Then after another year or so they just sold out to Sony and even though they SAID they would continue to support thier customers until VGS went completely to sony(scheduled at the time for 6-12 months later cant remember) they never released a single update beyond 1.4.1(which had been released a good while ago) No OS X version no version to work in classic not even a 1.5 WHAT A WASTE!!!!!
it was an excellent product, and that is the exact reason sony bought it, they couldnt help it.

iJon

[iJon]

Originally posted by awulf
PowerMac's are highly upgradable, the only thing that would be expensive to upgrade is the CPU (which a PC can't upgrade as far as a Mac can, i.e. my PM7600/132 can be upgraded to a G4), other than that you can use what ever brand of memory, hard disks and CD-ROM/RW drives. this is very true, we are very close but one thing is lacking. the mobo. we cant upgrade the mobo, that is where the pc shines, i can go get a new mobo for about 100-200 dollars, get me a new processor of my choice, and probably have to get some new ram. and that is all cheaper than a good cpu upgrade for the mac, let alone a new mobo for the mac.

iJon

[Malus120]

Originally posted by iJon
it was an excellent product, and that is the exact reason sony bought it, they couldnt help it.

iJon
True they coundlt stop the whole lawsuit and ill almost forgive them for selling out(im sure it was a lot of cash), my issue here is the quality of thier customer support, the fact that they tottally left thier customers for dead not once, but TWICE, just really pisses me off.

[Centris 650]

My question is will RealPC be SoftWindows under another name, therefore older versions would be upgradeable or will RPC be severing it's connections with SW? I haven't used SW98 since I got my iBook in Jan of 2001. It would be nice to save some cahs and be able to upgrade though I'm not holding my breath. :rolleyes: :D

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by Malus120
Oh **** another one i gotta aruge. Personally I almost hate Connectix for what they did to poor Virtual Game Station(a playstation Emu and one of the best products to come out of that ****ty company), some of the really stupid decisions they made with VPC(slow, dropping/not improving vid card support),ect.
With VGS they made some of the worst customer support/customer relations decisions ever. When the court ordered them(at Sony's request) to temporarily stop selling(NOT stop supporting as far as i know) VGS while they reviewed the facts or whatever they NEVER ONCE updated VGS during this period and by the time the order was FINNALY lifted they released a Windows V 1.3 and left the mac at 1.2(of course they rectified this later by giving us 1.4 first but still) when an update to 1.2 had been in desperate need for months(many newer games were having problems). Then after another year or so they just sold out to Sony and even though they SAID they would continue to support thier customers until VGS went completely to sony(scheduled at the time for 6-12 months later cant remember) they never released a single update beyond 1.4.1(which had been released a good while ago) No OS X version no version to work in classic not even a 1.5 WHAT A WASTE!!!!!

Yeah, well, I said in its day. I don't know about VGS, but they made better memory management than Apple and better extension management than Apple. In their day. I havn't kept up with them since I stopped needing RAM Doubler. But there was a time when you might still use the product without doubling your ram because the memory management was more efficient. Personally I think Apple should have absorbed them long ago.

[bousozoku]

Originally posted by Malus120
True they coundlt stop the whole lawsuit and ill almost forgive them for selling out(im sure it was a lot of cash), my issue here is the quality of thier customer support, the fact that they tottally left thier customers for dead not once, but TWICE, just really pisses me off.

When they were told by the courts not to distribute it, that included updates, whether anyone needed them or not.

They're quite a good company, with good developers and they advanced Mac development quite a bit. I'm sure they went further with experimentation, but it proved unstable and they left things where they were.

[reiggin]

How can they, as the macrumors.com blurb says, be planning both OS 9 *and* OS X versions when, according to the interview, they are working with the Solaris UNIX code and, because of that, it will interact more closely with the hardware, via the kernel, I suppose. Even in the interview, he comments on the limitations of OS 9, citing that it doesn't allow as much access to the hardware. So where does macrumors.com get this info about there being an OS 9 version?!? And why would they do such a thing? 9 is dead, people. Developers should really just stop wasting their time. Except Quark. They shouldn't break tradition or anything.

-Reiggin

[reiggin]

Originally posted by awulf
PowerMac's are highly upgradable, the only thing that would be expensive to upgrade is the CPU (which a PC can't upgrade as far as a Mac can, i.e. my PM7600/132 can be upgraded to a G4),

One word: Motherboard.

Yeah, you can upgrade your 7600 to a G4 but you're wasting time and money. Until you can purchase a new Mac motherboard for under $150 (new as in "newest") for your non-standard case, don't bring that one to the table. ATX is sweet. PowerMac's are NOT highly upgradable until they meet that kind of a standard. Which they never will. Jobs wouldn't have it any other way.

-Reiggin

[awulf]

Originally posted by reiggin
One word: Motherboard.

Yeah, you can upgrade your 7600 to a G4 but you're wasting time and money. Until you can purchase a new Mac motherboard for under $150 (new as in "newest") for your non-standard case, don't bring that one to the table. ATX is sweet. PowerMac's are NOT highly upgradable until they meet that kind of a standard. Which they never will. Jobs wouldn't have it any other way.

-Reiggin

Yes I agree, you can't upgrade the motherboard in those macs but if you have replaced everything but the casing then it isn't a PowerMac [value] anymore. If you want complete control then build your own Mac (There is a page on the net but I can't find it anymore). Buy a second hand G4 motherboard, and ATX case, CD-ROM.....

[AhmedFaisal]

The one thing that royally annoys me about VPC is that the progs run in a separate desktop window, baaah. We need something that runs rootless and minimizes to the dock. Even better would be something like Wine that spares you from having to install a MickeySoft Winblows in the first place.
Cheers,

Ahmed

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by awulf
Buy a second hand G4 motherboard, and ATX case, CD-ROM.....

See, that's the problem, you don't have to buy used stuff to upgrade a PC, you can buy it new. And there's no shortage of people who will sell it to you. Or, consequently people buying it (ahem).

Jobs really needs to get off his high horse on this one. It is SERIOUSLY hampering the growth of Apple's market share. But that's just my opinion...maybe someday people will agree with Jobs that they should have to buy used goods or tap the college fund to buy a new computer so they can get a speed bump...what do I know....

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by AhmedFaisal
The one thing that royally annoys me about VPC is that the progs run in a separate desktop window, baaah. We need something that runs rootless and minimizes to the dock. Even better would be something like Wine that spares you from having to install a MickeySoft Winblows in the first place.
Cheers,

Ahmed

I do get tired of people talking about WINE. It's impossible to port WINE to MacOS X. It would be like saying 'let's port MOL to RedHat Linux...' (For those of you that aren't familiar with it, MOL is Mac On Linux, which runs under many - perhaps all - flavors of PPC linux.)

WINE uses the processor, just like the OS. If the processor isn't an x86, then WINE can't run.

[Snowy_River]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
See, that's the problem, you don't have to buy used stuff to upgrade a PC, you can buy it new. And there's no shortage of people who will sell it to you. Or, consequently people buying it (ahem).

Jobs really needs to get off his high horse on this one. It is SERIOUSLY hampering the growth of Apple's market share. But that's just my opinion...maybe someday people will agree with Jobs that they should have to buy used goods or tap the college fund to buy a new computer so they can get a speed bump...what do I know....

There are a couple of things that this overlooks. (Mind you, there's a degree to which I agree with you, but I just felt that these points should be made...)

Part of the reason that the MacOS is so nice is because Apple has such good control over the hardware that it runs on. If Apple had to worry about the hardware that everyone was running on, we might have a much more unstable OS, like Windows.

Secondly, one of the reasons that Apple pulled the plug on the clones is because, for the most part, it wasn't helping Apple's market share. It was simply decreasing the number of machines that Apple sold (less $ for development).

For now, Apple maintaining such a tight hold on the hardware is, at least in some ways, to our advantage.

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by Snowy_River
There are a couple of things that this overlooks. (Mind you, there's a degree to which I agree with you, but I just felt that these points should be made...)

Part of the reason that the MacOS is so nice is because Apple has such good control over the hardware that it runs on. If Apple had to worry about the hardware that everyone was running on, we might have a much more unstable OS, like Windows.

Yes, I agree, but I'll let Apple worry about standard configurations if I can attempt to upgrade at my own risk. Apple needs to strike a little bit better of a balance between simplifying things for the user and allowing them to play with fire, in my opinion, at least on this point.


Secondly, one of the reasons that Apple pulled the plug on the clones is because, for the most part, it wasn't helping Apple's market share. It was simply decreasing the number of machines that Apple sold (less $ for development).

Well, yes and no. From my understanding of the situation, they pulled the plug because the clone-makers weren't helping them compete with PCs, they were only competing with Apple's existing business. Apple making their motherboards and processors available for sale is more selling of their own product -- in smaller chunks. People recycling motherboards and processors does nothing for their business. And how big is their profit margin on CPUs? Is it as big as OS licenses? I wonder how it would pan out if they sold 300,000 less computers, but sold 600,000 chipsets and 300,000 more OS X licenses? Assuming people weren't using the chipsets to upgrade, but to build...


For now, Apple maintaining such a tight hold on the hardware is, at least in some ways, to our advantage.

Well, I truly do want what's best for the company (and therefore good for all of us), but I believe that they need to be less margin oriented and more revenue oriented. Hell, with the bank at 4.4 bil, I'd be willing to see them lose money for a couple of years straight if it meant a significant increase in market share. The current ratio is just rediculous.

The solution, I think, is at the very least to offer upgrade packages like they did with the LCs, except not to suck. That way they could have a tight control of the hardware through licensed installers and still offer their customers a way to keep up with the times. If I could pay $300 to upgrade my processor I would do it at much more regular intervals than buying.

Anyway...what thread was this again???

[Sol]

From the rumors about the next generation of PowerMac motherboards I have learned that the processors will be on something call a Zif daughter-card or something like that. I assume this means that upgrades will be easier than the current system. Perhaps Apple will offer the upgrades themselves.

As for Real PC, we will know if it is better than Virtual PC in a few weeks. I hope that FWB also consider making a few console emulators so that we can play yet more games on the Mac. I have yet to see a Saturn emulator for the Mac and I have yet to see PSX on OS X. I know there is one in development but I do not have a file called the BIOS ROM so I do not know how good that one is.

[dongmin]

Focus, focus people. Don't let this thread degenerate to a "this console is better than this console" debate or a "PCs are so much more upgradable than Macs" discussion. Been there, done that.

Anyways, getting back on topic, did you guys read the OSCast.com rumor (http://www.oscast.com/stories/storyReader$278)? I've never heard of these guys and I'm sure they're making up most of their stuff, but this part really raised my eyebrows:

A source close to Apple recently relayed information to oscast suggesting that Apple had intended to use emulation software to show the power and performance of its upcoming hardware. This individual stated that Windows software running in emulation performed certain instructions significantly faster than what a hard PC was able to do.

Another (separate) source told oscast that a key reason for Microsoft's acquisition of Connectix's PC emulator, was to "discontinue development of a version of [Virtual PC] that would take advantage of two unreleased hardware technologies that would significantly boost the software's performance."

Incredible, if you ask me. What "two unreleased hardware technologies" could they be talking about? Yes we know about the 970, but what's the second? Hypertransport? RapidIO? Apple Processor Interconnect? PCI-X?

If this is indeed true, couldn't Microsoft's actions be interpreted as being "monopolistic" or a kind of collusion? They acquired a company and killed the development of an emulation product that would have benefitted a competitior (Apple) and discredited the Windows-Intel platform?

[Sol]

Well, if an emulated Windows would run faster on a 970 computer that would reflect worse on Intel than Microsoft. With Real PC back in the game I do not think Microsoft will do anything to slow down Virtual PC. By the way, Microsoft made a point of the continuation of Virtual PC's development for OS X so I would not jump to any conclusions about monopolistic practices.

As for the two unreleased technologies, I have no idea what the second one would be. From all the suggestions you made only the Apple Processor Interconnect is a Mac-only product but you would have to explain to me what that is before I could believe this is it.

[bikertwin]

From the interview:

"will RealPC use Altivec?"

"To be honest, I don't know the answer to this question."


OK, folks, if this guy doesn't even know what processor features the product uses, how can we trust what he says about performance? Of course a company is going to say "our product is the bestest and fastest" but based on his lack of technical knowledge, his claims seem dubious.

100% unadulterated marketing fluff, IMHO.

[iJon]

Originally posted by awulf
Yes I agree, you can't upgrade the motherboard in those macs but if you have replaced everything but the casing then it isn't a PowerMac [value] anymore. If you want complete control then build your own Mac (There is a page on the net but I can't find it anymore). Buy a second hand G4 motherboard, and ATX case, CD-ROM.....
a g4 mobo isnt the standard atx form factor. and plus you cant buy a new g4 mobo easily, it will cost you about 500-1000 dollars. and by the time you tie that into a new cpu upgrade you have the price of a new mac. it just isnt worth it.

iJon

[Raiwong]

going back to the game subject I second to that macs virtually have no up to date games, especially in the area of more complicated games like RPGs , MMORPG and also numerous other PC games and these games are good.

I would like to play neocron ( MMORPG), Freelancer, Age of methodology, battlefield, syberia, mafia, c&c and many more others which r never released on the mac. I also am waiting desperately for unreal tournament 2003 not to mention halflife mods like CS and NS won't run then there are all the space simulation games I like. There is just too much to talk about. Blizzard is about the only company that produces mac versions on the fly I really like them.

in addition emulators on mac are also behind PC has Ps emulators and others while macers are stuck with a backward snes9x system. Arguably the best game developement syastem 3D studio max doesn't even run on the mac no.

anybody who says mac have games on par with pc is hard to undestand, but I agree that mac don't not have games they do but in no way to the crap box.

If this emulation becomes reality i'll be so happy willing to pay high price for it,

[dongmin]

Originally posted by bikertwin
100% unadulterated marketing fluff, IMHO.

I tend to agree, although as a user of a Windows-only program on VirtualPC, I really hope the new RealPC delivers a real performance improvement over VPC. I'm not asking for faster-than-PC performace or 100 fps on a 3rd-person shooter emulated on my Mac; I just want something faster than Pentium II 200 mhz.

This FWB guy is really reaching when he makes direct references to rumors. No doubt he's trying to generate some hype.

[kcmac]

A couple of years back, I think it was the SoftWindows people, kept showing up at conventions touting that they were going to kick VPC's backside. Never happened.

Now Real PC suddenly comes out of the closet and says that in a few weeks they will kick VPC's backside. And that the only reason that they haven't done so to date is because they had an arrangement with Connectix that they wouldn't develop it.

MS buys Connectix and all of a sudden this agreement is null and void? I don't think so. MS would have purchased this agreement with the deal. (If there was a deal.)

I also am suspicious of a company that would agree not to compete. That sounds like a real long term loyal mac developer to me.

The interview was complete marketing BS. No doubt they are developing something, but it will also be compatible with OS 9. Or so they say.

So how is this thing going to be faster? Because of the 970. Will it be faster for our current macs? I ain't banking on it. And I'm not buying this talk.

I am betting that MS will further develop VPC because it still represents software sales. Buy VPC. Buy versions of Windows OS. I just hope they don't stop developing Mac Office and instead make us buy MS Office and use it emulation mode.

[Frobozz]

I use VirtualPC 5 and it runs the 2 or 3 proprietary apps I need to run, and is useful for testing my pages on Windows IE. Who does FWB think they can woo from VirtualPC? You're never going to be able to play games on an emulator like this, so what you're left with is simply feature parity with VirtualPC.

PC emulators, in general, are a bad idea for the Mac. The only thing they are good for are the things above. If we all get excited about PC emulation software, then why not just buy a cheap PC for $300. Either way, you're supporting the evil empire through OS sales, but at least you could play some PC-only games...

[AppleMatt]

Originally posted by kcmac
Buy versions of Windows OS.

No no, save your money and buy 10.3. Then copy windows off a mate :D

AppleMatt

[kcmac]

Applemat,

I know you used a smiley, but I don't think I would ever use a version of any OS that I didn't buy. Especially windows. Activation codes, etc. Support. :)

[bousozoku]

Originally posted by reiggin
How can they, as the macrumors.com blurb says, be planning both OS 9 *and* OS X versions when, according to the interview, they are working with the Solaris UNIX code and, because of that, it will interact more closely with the hardware, via the kernel, I suppose. Even in the interview, he comments on the limitations of OS 9, citing that it doesn't allow as much access to the hardware. So where does macrumors.com get this info about there being an OS 9 version?!? And why would they do such a thing? 9 is dead, people. Developers should really just stop wasting their time. Except Quark. They shouldn't break tradition or anything.

-Reiggin

The Mac OS 9.x version has been out there for a long time, dating back before Virtual PC came along.

[reiggin]

Originally posted by bousozoku
The Mac OS 9.x version has been out there for a long time, dating back before Virtual PC came along.

Sure but the interview speaks of a complete re-write/going to the Solaris version. That would seem to ELIMINATE os 9 support. This new and improved version, therefore, should not be able to or encouraged to (wasted development) support OS 9.

[iindigo]

Hey guys, do you think RealPC X will give my indigo iMac DV 400 any hope in the emulation world?

[Frobozz]

Originally posted by iindigo
Hey guys, do you think RealPC X will give my indigo iMac DV 400 any hope in the emulation world?

Honestly... no. Not to be a bummer, but I have a dual 1GHz with VirtualPC and it's snappy for daily tasks but no speed demon... I sincerely doubt teh FWB offering will be any faster.

[eric_n_dfw]

Trying not to get too far off topic, but what ever happened to the Mac implementation of MS's DirectX libraries. It was not only supposed to ease the porting of Windows based games to OS X, but also would allow multiplayer games to be cross-platform. (ie: I bought Risk II a couple years ago but have played it very little as I cannot play online against my friends on their PC's)

[minux]

"Trying not to get too far off topic, but what ever happened to the Mac implementation of MS's DirectX libraries. "

Short answer, thanks to Linux OpenGL has been given a second chance. Since Linux is an Open Source OS, and since MSOFT will not make their DirectX libraries OpenSource, Linux will continue to run OpenGL.

Now in terms of Apple, this was a huge advantage. OpenGL is a quantum leap ahead of DirectX (at the moment), and on top of that it is free for Apple to use.

But, to answer your question, DirectX libraries were fully implemented in Mac OS 9.3, before X and Jobs killed any future revisions of Mac OS 9.

Mike

[eric_n_dfw]

Originally posted by minux
"Trying not to get too far off topic, but what ever happened to the Mac implementation of MS's DirectX libraries. "

Short answer, thanks to Linux OpenGL has been given a second chance. Since Linux is an Open Source OS, and since MSOFT will not make their DirectX libraries OpenSource, Linux will continue to run OpenGL.

Now in terms of Apple, this was a huge advantage. OpenGL is a quantum leap ahead of DirectX (at the moment), and on top of that it is free for Apple to use.

But, to answer your question, DirectX libraries were fully implemented in Mac OS 9.3, before X and Jobs killed any future revisions of Mac OS 9.

Mike No, I'm talking about a third party that has written OS X libraries that map DirectX API calls to Open GL. I'll look for the link and post it if I can remember where I saw it.

[eric_n_dfw]

Originally posted by eric_n_dfw
No, I'm talking about a third party that has written OS X libraries that map DirectX API calls to Open GL. I'll look for the link and post it if I can remember where I saw it. The link is www.coderus.com
Their product is "MacDX" and supports DirectX APIs for DX 7,8 and 9.
It's Carbon so it should work on both OS 9 and X and, if their web site is to be believed, it does support the "DirectPlay" interfaces which are the network gameplay pieces I was asking about. (So I may have just answered my own question there! )

[h00ligan]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Actually, the Xbox was behind everyone else, which is why it was faster when it was released ;)



Yes, well, as I said, only the cream tends to come to the Mac. As has been said in the previous replies, quality is what matters.

And Activision isn't getting my money either. Unless they are under new management...kinda like France.

But I stand by what I said about Microsoft. I won't buy or use their products when I can help it, not at all, irregardless of quality, because they are only serving to squash all the fine, creative, but too small developers out there. They poison every company that gets in bed with them, and they will buy out anything that gets in their way. I especially won't buy their console because I like Sony and Nintendo, and I don't want to support the undercutting of more great products.

Anyway...this is getting way off topic.

A PC emulator better have really good graphics card usage or it will still be useless to gamers (I guess that's why everyone's so excited about this article). Sorry to get on my soapbox.

alright i really have to chime in here, i have read enough of your infantile opinions today.

I am not anti MS or am i pro MS, i just dropped 3g's on a tibook and i love it, i worked for apple, I am an MCSE though as well. Now i work in a mixed network environment , which includes redhat.

The fact that you go on to say that you won't buy anything MS makes becuase they are a monopoly and use their weight to influence people, is laughable...considering you are all up on the ps2. Point blank if there is one company which does this more than anyone else out there, including MS , it is SONY. Sony KNEW there was a problem with the design of the PS2 when it was released in the US. There were something like 800,000 returns in Japan when it first shipped. Knowing that they sold an unchaged product to the american masses. When people felt they paid too much for the LIMITED PS2, they started to return them. Sony wrote a letter to all it's resellers stating that if a custmer wanted to return a PS2 that was not OBVIOUSLY defective, they had to call SONY. This invalidated teh resellers 30 day return policy. i.e. if yo ubuy a game cube from best buy, within 30 days you can take it back, even for just not liking it. When the customers then called sony, they were told they could send their unit in for a checkup, they were also told that they would NOT be issuing cash refunds, nor would the stores. In essence they made it impossile to return this machine for which so many had held great expectations. Even when it didn't live up to those.

Since that time, Sony has continued to do business in a shady way, quite possibly instilling fear into game develiopers that want to do business for the cube and xbox. Perhaps telling developers that if they ported a game to xyz, they would no longer be able to develop for the PS2, which as we all know, holds the highest market share.

That is only ONE avenue of crappy business ethics and practices by a company that has made a name not through innovation, but by taking the hard work of others, streamlining it, and selling it cheaper. JUST THE WAY MICROSOFT DOES. If you are gunna hate one, hate the other, or just **** about it.

-h00ligan

[minux]

Eric,

Oh right, I thought you were talking about Apple's support for DirectX. And, no the Carbon libraries will not run in 9, of course, as we all know, any skilled programmer can get either Cocoa/Carbon Apps to be running in 9.

Mike

[VegetaPunk]

YES, Now I might be able to play World of WarCraft.

I would just like to say the SOME of the "cream of the crop" games come out for mac, blizzard might not even come out with World of Warcraft for mac. With the exception of Blizzard most mac games come out a long time after the PC version. *cough*EQ*cough* that game was a really good game......5 years ago.

[eric_n_dfw]

Originally posted by minux
Eric,

Oh right, I thought you were talking about Apple's support for DirectX. And, no the Carbon libraries will not run in 9, of course, as we all know, any skilled programmer can get either Cocoa/Carbon Apps to be running in 9.

Mike
You lost me there.

If it's Carbon, and doesn't use any OS X specific things, it should work in Mac OS 9.

(Plus their web sight says, "Seamlessly Supports Mac OS 9.x and Mac OS X")

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by h00ligan
alright i really have to chime in here, i have read enough of your infantile opinions today.

That really hurts man.

Now i work in a mixed network environment , which includes redhat.

And I have worked on a mixed network too, which included NT, 95, 98, and 9.X. Cool, huh.

The fact that you go on to say that you won't buy anything MS makes becuase they are a monopoly and use their weight to influence people, is laughable...considering you are all up on the ps2.

Did I not mention I also own a GameCube?

Point blank if there is one company which does this more than anyone else out there, including MS , it is SONY. Sony KNEW there was a problem with the design of the PS2 when it was released in the US. There were something like 800,000 returns in Japan when it first shipped. Knowing that they sold an unchaged product to the american masses. When people felt they paid too much for the LIMITED PS2, they started to return them. Sony wrote a letter to all it's resellers stating that if a custmer wanted to return a PS2 that was not OBVIOUSLY defective, they had to call SONY. This invalidated teh resellers 30 day return policy. i.e. if yo ubuy a game cube from best buy, within 30 days you can take it back, even for just not liking it. When the customers then called sony, they were told they could send their unit in for a checkup, they were also told that they would NOT be issuing cash refunds, nor would the stores. In essence they made it impossile to return this machine for which so many had held great expectations. Even when it didn't live up to those.

OK, I never said Sony is perfect, you're the one who went off on this because I own a PS2, but I digress. I am well aware of Sony's drive problems, thank you. I've had a couple of PS1s go bad on me myself. And I tried calling their hardware support line. And took it back to WalMart (even though I bought it at Software Etc.) because I was in the middle of FFVIII and didn't want to wait three weeks to get it back. Whether or not the PS2 "lived up to its expectations," well, that's your opinion. The fact that the subsequent two systems -- one following by what, a year or so? Not counting the original Japan release -- have outperformed it is a big no duh to anyone in electronics. Really, no freakin duh. But I don't know anyone that was disappointed by the system when it arrived.

By the way, since you are such an expert in defective products you are probably aware of the open sockets problem in Windows. Did you know that MS released XP knowing FULL WELL that they had a VERY SERIOUS securtiy issue in their OS? They actually had a reasonably high profile programmer who wrote some security software to alleviate this, writing them repeatedly pleading with them not to release XP with this "feature" intact, as they did with previous versions. But they did it anyway...and released a patch after a while. And, OBTW, an Army server running Windows got hacked into during the war. Just a footnote, I'm not implying it was due to the same "feature".

Since that time, Sony has continued to do business in a shady way, quite possibly instilling fear into game develiopers that want to do business for the cube and xbox. Perhaps telling developers that if they ported a game to xyz, they would no longer be able to develop for the PS2, which as we all know, holds the highest market share.


Well, they possibly did this and maybe did that. And we all know "possibly" and "maybe" have to be used when talking about Microsoft's shady business practices, right? It's not like they do things for the whole world to see which are verifiably bad business...we might have to make something up and assume its true...

That is only ONE avenue of crappy business ethics and practices by a company that has made a name not through innovation, but by taking the hard work of others, streamlining it, and selling it cheaper. JUST THE WAY MICROSOFT DOES. If you are gunna hate one, hate the other, or just **** about it.

-h00ligan

I don't have to hate Sony, thanks. I'm not "all up on them" either, any more than I am "all up on" Apple. Both companies do bad and stupid things (welcome to multi-billion dollar corporate business) but I believe you are wrong when you compare the two. And you are making a moot point when you talk about "using the hard work of others and streamlining it..." gee, that's how the technology...science...automotive...aw, heck, that's the way the corporate world works. Congratulations for noticing.

You, on the other hand, believe you are right, and in a free society that is your druthers. But unless guided by my own volition, I will "****" when the moderators, not you, tell me to. Thanks.

[bousozoku]

Originally posted by minux
Eric,

Oh right, I thought you were talking about Apple's support for DirectX. And, no the Carbon libraries will not run in 9, of course, as we all know, any skilled programmer can get either Cocoa/Carbon Apps to be running in 9.

Mike

What?

General Carbon applications and libraries run in Mac OS 9 as well as X. You can make them specific enough either way so they don't work in the other; however, even some applications using Nib files will work in 9.

Cocoa applications do not work in Mac OS 9.

[eric_n_dfw]

Originally posted by minux
Eric,

Oh right, I thought you were talking about Apple's support for DirectX. And, no the Carbon libraries will not run in 9, of course, as we all know, any skilled programmer can get either Cocoa/Carbon Apps to be running in 9.

Mike I'm searching Apple's developer site for anything about them supporting DirectX in the past and cannot find it. They mention DirectX in comparison to GameSprockets in saying that GameSprockets implements a subset of DirectX's functionality, but they never say that there is/was an Apple DirectX library.

[bousozoku]

Originally posted by eric_n_dfw
I'm searching Apple's developer site for anything about them supporting DirectX in the past and cannot find it. They mention DirectX in comparison to GameSprockets in saying that GameSprockets implements a subset of DirectX's functionality, but they never say that there is/was an Apple DirectX library.

That's because there never was.

[Haberdasher]

Originally posted by Malus120
Hah hah Xbox "really ahead of everyone else". Yeah right. The ONLY way Xbox has any real lead at all over any of the consoles is in PURE hardware power, and as anyone who's been in the console market for 5 or more years can tell you its not power that wins the console wars, but game quality. As things stand right now the Xbox has a few good games(especially if your into shooters and PC Ports), and even some uniqe ones(DOAXVB, Panzer Dragoon,ect),but it just cant compare(IMO) to the large number of quality games on PS2 or even GameCube. Sorry just couldnt let that point sit unchallanged :D

EVERYONE LOOK AT THIS POST! I HAVE A HURTFULLY IRONIC POINT TO MAKE!

Probably in the only insight I will provide today, have you noticed how you are attacking the XBox for one of the same reasons you are defending the Mac? The Mac is like the XBox...actually even less so...as it only gets a few of the games. Even though these are the cream of the crop, it is still an inferior platform. (This is the Xbox I'm talking about)

Doesn't everyone remember that age-old defense of the Mac? We only get the cream of the crop...even though we miss a LOT, we don't get crap.

The only difference is that the XBox is actually faster compared to the other consoles, unlike with the Mac's situation...:D

Don't get me wrong, I'm typing on my Mac and love it dearly for music to movies to mail to graphic editing and more. But the notion that by getting fewer programs it is better than the PC is juvenielle...you could probably do about 5 minutes of research and avoid the crap.

[eric_n_dfw]

Originally posted by bousozoku
That's because there never was. I thought not. So, minux, where did you get the Apple supported DirectX info?

[sjestus]

anyone know if RealPC will have cd authoring or dvd capabilities?? i hope so.. that'd be sweet so i could use Nero :-D lol...

thanx

[Raiwong]

I disagree to say that macs have the cream of the crop apart from one or two games mostly from blizzard most of the other games that come out are not really cream of the crop.

You'd call things like ghost recon cream of the crop? and Formula 2000 (bad graphics) i've seen much better cames on the pc.

The solution : Get a console...to be honestly I think PS2 is better.

[Haberdasher]

Originally posted by Raiwong
I disagree to say that macs have the cream of the crop apart from one or two games mostly from blizzard most of the other games that come out are not really cream of the crop.

You'd call things like ghost recon cream of the crop? and Formula 2000 (bad graphics) i've seen much better cames on the pc.

The solution : Get a console...to be honestly I think PS2 is better.

I do have a PS2, and it is far better for games.

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by Haberdasher
EVERYONE LOOK AT THIS POST! I HAVE A HURTFULLY IRONIC POINT TO MAKE!

Probably in the only insight I will provide today, have you noticed how you are attacking the XBox for one of the same reasons you are defending the Mac? The Mac is like the XBox...actually even less so...as it only gets a few of the games. Even though these are the cream of the crop, it is still an inferior platform. (This is the Xbox I'm talking about)

Doesn't everyone remember that age-old defense of the Mac? We only get the cream of the crop...even though we miss a LOT, we don't get crap.

The only difference is that the XBox is actually faster compared to the other consoles, unlike with the Mac's situation...:D

Don't get me wrong, I'm typing on my Mac and love it dearly for music to movies to mail to graphic editing and more. But the notion that by getting fewer programs it is better than the PC is juvenielle...you could probably do about 5 minutes of research and avoid the crap.

Well I think you have mixed two different perspectives here. When we say that the Mac gets the cream of the crop, we are saying that if you are interested in playing the best games you will not usually be SOL with a Mac, but you will have to wait, and you will not always get what you want. A Mac, as you have pointed out, is responsible for more than just playing games, so if you're talking about from a purely games perspective, then I go back to my original point, which is go buy a PC if that's all you want out of your computer.

But when it comes to the Xbox you are talking about something that is designed only for games, so if it doesn't have the games then what good is it? It doesn't have the cream of the crop, it just has less games, one or two great ones exclusive to it. It won't have any SquareEnix games on it, or any of Nintendo's fine products such as Zelda or Mario or Metroid, it won't have Jak and Daxter or Vexx or Ratchet and Clank, it won't have Xenosaga...etc, etc, etc.

But, hey! It did manage to take away the crown jewel of the Mac gaming community, the makers of some of the finest games of their period, Bungie, and monopolize them. Thanks guys. I'm sure that was a total coincidence...:rolleyes:

[iJon]

Originally posted by Raiwong
I disagree to say that macs have the cream of the crop apart from one or two games mostly from blizzard most of the other games that come out are not really cream of the crop.

You'd call things like ghost recon cream of the crop? and Formula 2000 (bad graphics) i've seen much better cames on the pc.

The solution : Get a console...to be honestly I think PS2 is better.
i agree with yo utoo, did you notice nobody commented on my list of the top 10 games from pc, and we had none them, so much for the cream of the crop.

iJon

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by iJon
i agree with yo utoo, did you notice nobody commented on my list of the top 10 games from pc, and we had none them, so much for the cream of the crop.

iJon

Blizzard games are the cream of the crop. So are id games. Unreal tends to be considered at least a "top ten" game with every successive release too.

I would go back and look at your list, but if you are saying that we don't have the cream of the crop based on that list I would have to refer you to the wall full of "Game of the Year" awards which have been given to each one of the last...like, five Blizzard games, and id games, and the Unreal games....don't make me go back to Bungie again, but this applied to them too.... If your list is the cream of the crop, these games are the creme de la creme.

I guess it really depends on whether or not you need a large game catalogue on your computer, or whether you are satisfied playing the majority of the very best computer games on your computer and playing the very best of console games on your console...I hold the same standard either way, really. But I'm just a snob that way...same with music......

Oh, and blah blah blah....emulator....

[MacsRgr8]

So Connectix made FWB stop making Real PC a few years ago?
How long will it take Microshop to "buy out" Real PC?

"real UNIX app, SMP support, low level hardware support"
"dunno if we use altivec"
I wonder if this FSB spokesman works at Disney.

[iJon]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Blizzard games are the cream of the crop. So are id games. Unreal tends to be considered at least a "top ten" game with every successive release too.

I would go back and look at your list, but if you are saying that we don't have the cream of the crop based on that list I would have to refer you to the wall full of "Game of the Year" awards which have been given to each one of the last...like, five Blizzard games, and id games, and the Unreal games....don't make me go back to Bungie again, but this applied to them too.... If your list is the cream of the crop, these games are the creme de la creme.

I guess it really depends on whether or not you need a large game catalogue on your computer, or whether you are satisfied playing the majority of the very best computer games on your computer and playing the very best of console games on your console...I hold the same standard either way, really. But I'm just a snob that way...same with music......

Oh, and blah blah blah....emulator....
yes we did get warcraft 3, and it plays extremly well on the mac and pc. but that it just one game. are we getting battlefield, the number 1 game of the year,no. are we getting planetside or star wars galaxies, splinter cell, raven shield, americas army, no. macs do usually get some good games, but not all the good games. macs are just not good if you want to be a gamer. we just now got forcefeedback, we just now go ip over firewire for lan games, we dont have teamspeak, we dont have eax hd technology, we dont have games with 5.1 surround sound support, but the final thing is we just dont have a lot of good games that are coming out. there are so many great games for the pc that win top awards that we dont good, warcraft 3 is an exception, but thats it. im trying so hard not to get in an argument, its just macs are not gamin computers, we simply do not have enough games, and we lack some things that key people need when playing games, like teamspeak. but if you feel macs are gaming machines then its all good for you, i just feel anyone serious about gaming is gonna have a hard time getting it done on a mac.

iJon

[BaghdadBob]

Right. I'm not saying Macs are gaming machines. I'm saying they do get some great games. As far as Blizzard goes, we have their entire catalogue, and their entire catalogue consists of games of the year. So if you want every game that makes the cover of PC Gaming monthly --you're not gonna get it. But you will get some great ones, and Blizzard isn't the only one who makes them.

Look, to make myself completely clear here, I'm not saying that the Mac game catalogue is even comparable to the PC game catalogue. If you are a heavy gamer, it's just not going to be acceptable to you. Personally I like to play a few high-hour requirement games, and it really doesn't matter to me if I have splinter cell on my iMac, I can get it on my PS2, and that's a hell of a lot cheaper than a PC. I can also get SOCOM on my PS2, and that has "teamspeak". The Mac gaming community did get served a serious blow by the loss of Bungie, because to that point we had three companies making the best games in the world releasing all their products on the Mac.

All I'm saying is you're not completely lost at sea with a Mac as far as games go, but once again that depends on your standards and what you're after, and just how many of the top games you need.

I don't think we really disagree on this, we just come from different gaming perspectives.

In any event, I will be highly pleased if I will be able to run PC games on my Mac with good hardware support. Then I can go back and play Terrors of the Deep :p

[iindigo]

Let's not forget Pangea (http://pangeasoft.net/). They have provided great games for the Mac for a long time - they started on the Apple ][!. Right now they have seven 3D games and are working on another.

[iJon]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Right. I'm not saying Macs are gaming machines. I'm saying they do get some great games. As far as Blizzard goes, we have their entire catalogue, and their entire catalogue consists of games of the year. So if you want every game that makes the cover of PC Gaming monthly --you're not gonna get it. But you will get some great ones, and Blizzard isn't the only one who makes them.

Look, to make myself completely clear here, I'm not saying that the Mac game catalogue is even comparable to the PC game catalogue. If you are a heavy gamer, it's just not going to be acceptable to you. Personally I like to play a few high-hour requirement games, and it really doesn't matter to me if I have splinter cell on my iMac, I can get it on my PS2, and that's a hell of a lot cheaper than a PC. I can also get SOCOM on my PS2, and that has "teamspeak". The Mac gaming community did get served a serious blow by the loss of Bungie, because to that point we had three companies making the best games in the world releasing all their products on the Mac.

All I'm saying is you're not completely lost at sea with a Mac as far as games go, but once again that depends on your standards and what you're after, and just how many of the top games you need.

I don't think we really disagree on this, we just come from different gaming perspectives.

In any event, I will be highly pleased if I will be able to run PC games on my Mac with good hardware support. Then I can go back and play Terrors of the Deep :p
sounds good, now we are in the same boat.

iJon

[iJon]

Originally posted by iindigo
Let's not forget Pangea (http://pangeasoft.net/). They have provided great games for the Mac for a long time - they started on the Apple ][!. Right now they have seven 3D games and are working on another.
i guess, they are kindof fun, if you like to play bugdom and power pete. i consider those my cheezy games i play along with my freeverse games on my powermac. and then i have my pc for my non cheezy games. their new game looks pretty fun though, ill have to check it out.

iJon

[BaghdadBob]

Actually, I think one of the great strengths of Mac gaming is the shareware. I was playing Realmz back when the author was at Wisconsin state and it has been an excellent RPG engine (although I havn't played it in a few years, and the best scenario I played was "Destroy the Necronomicon").

While Fantasoft is in the picture (they have other cool games), let's not forget Ambrosia software -- sure, they mostly make small arcade games, but Escape Velocity is a lot of fun. I have found a ton of quality shareware games for the Mac. I don't know how it is on the PC side (although I know my top two have been released for PC), but there are some fine games out there.

Support shareware! I have...a couple of times!

Anyway, who am I to talk, I'm still playing Diablo II...just because there are 60,000 people playing Diablo II on battle.net at any given time...we have like 8 billion people in the world, that equals approximately 7,999,940,000 people in the world who aren't playing Diablo II...on Battle.net.

I'm a sucker for that kind of stuff...that's why I'm afraid to play a MMORPG -- I ignored the Sims for years, only to get totally sucked in for a month...and I wasn't even online....*sigh*...

[alexlai5050]

yea do u think realpc could play counter strike easily

[Raiwong]

good point, if it can emulate 3D even a 400mhz emulation can run CS and all the other HL mods like natural selection now that would be cool.

[MacCoaster]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
By the way, since you are such an expert in defective products you are probably aware of the open sockets problem in Windows. Did you know that MS released XP knowing FULL WELL that they had a VERY SERIOUS securtiy issue in their OS? They actually had a reasonably high profile programmer who wrote some security software to alleviate this, writing them repeatedly pleading with them not to release XP with this "feature" intact, as they did with previous versions. But they did it anyway...and released a patch after a while. And, OBTW, an Army server running Windows got hacked into during the war. Just a footnote, I'm not implying it was due to the same "feature".
Microsoft released Windows XP to manufacturing (RTM) then suddenly found a bug with some USB plug-n-play thing, but made it patched before it was even released to the general public. Not everything is perfect, not even Mac OS X.

Or are you talking about that "security bug" where you could boot in Windows 2000 CD to a XP partition? That's intended. It's called administration. It helps especially if you've got encrypted files with NTFS' Encrypted File System features and forgot the password. That happens to many people. The problem here is that only physical security is at risk. Hell, I can make a Linux boot floppy and boot any Linux computer as root without the password. Same thing. Hell, I can even boot off Mac OS X's install CD and CHANGE THE FRIGGIN ROOT PASSWORD without knowing the old one. [edit #2] You also can boot in single user mode in Mac OS X without the root password.

[edit: by the way, you're very vague on what bug this was, please clarify]

The Army server that got hacked was because of the WebDAV bug, it got fixed. Again, not all software are perfect. Many UNIX servers have been hacked before. I really think it's just, many many times, the administrator's fault. A friend's Windows 2000 Server has been running hack-proof for years and many people have tried to pry it open to no avail, even through SQL Slammer (already patched), IIS Code Red, Nimda, etc.

[parenthesis]

Single-User Booting Root access with no password:

Res Ex. Link (http://www.resexcellence.com/hack_html_01/11-07-01.shtml)

[BaghdadBob]

Actually, the open sockets bug had existed in at least one previous OS, and to the best of my knowledge, XP did ship with it intact, and then needed to be patched.

I guess that's what happens when you try and emulate the beauty of Macs plug-n-play technology...which is PERFECT! :p

No, no software is perfect, but the, uh, "discussion" was about releasing a known fault, which MS did.

I actually don't want to go into this too much further because I'm going to have to go and source my points, I just wanted to shut up some *****le who was calling me "infantile" for supporting the PS2 and not Microsoft, because apparently Sony is worse than MS, to which I disagree.

Who knows, maybe he's still lurking in the shadows, waiting for me to open my mouth so he can call me a lactophage and insult my mommy.

But I aint all about that, yo. Some fools just be hatin'.

[MacCoaster]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Actually, the open sockets bug had existed in at least one previous OS, and to the best of my knowledge, XP did ship with it intact, and then needed to be patched.
Got any link? I'm interested in what this was.

Will

[BaghdadBob]

http://grc.com/xpdite/xpdite.htm

This isn't the original page I first read about it on, but you can probably find some good info here.

Before you start thinking they're trying to sell you something, remember that the software there is freeware.

My fiancee got some software, I don't remember if it was this, but after she turned on all the security features she was certified "Stealth" by a testing page. She was happy :D

on EDIT

Having actually taken two additional minutes to peruse the page I found the right thing.

http://grc.com/unpnp/unpnp.htm

Universal Plug'n'Play! Wonderful technology. Have you seen South Park, B,L,&U? God, I love that scene with Bill Gates. And every scene with Saddam Hussein (especially his dance routine). And the UN scene, that's classic... Anyway.

end EDIT

[eric_n_dfw]

Originally posted by MacCoaster
Or are you talking about that "security bug" where you could boot in Windows 2000 CD to a XP partition? That's intended. It's called administration. It helps especially if you've got encrypted files with NTFS' Encrypted File System features and forgot the password. That happens to many people. The problem here is that only physical security is at risk. Hell, I can make a Linux boot floppy and boot any Linux computer as root without the password. Same thing. Hell, I can even boot off Mac OS X's install CD and CHANGE THE FRIGGIN ROOT PASSWORD without knowing the old one. [edit #2] You also can boot in single user mode in Mac OS X without the root password.
If you let some un-authorized person get access to the console of your server, you deserve to be hacked! Lock it up somewhere for pete's sake!

[kneeslasher]

So.... any update on real pc?

[Veldek]

So.... any update on real pc?

Wow, what a question! Real PC turned out to be the biggest fake of last year. They just wanted to sell their old version and so told everybody what the new version would be like, but they lied all the way...

[kneeslasher]

One feels a little sheepish. Bit of a pity that. SO the old version is usable or a piece of crap?

[macnemo]

bummer...

[Sun Baked]

Sort of funny, I though the old CEO was fired for making an announcemnet of the return of this product for the Mac and how the new CEO of FWB was launching an investigation to see if there was actually a product behind the announcement.My name is Marko Kostyrko

I have removed Mr Mark Strathdee as CEO of FWB software and replaced him with myself.

The process of handing over is still under way and I have not as yet had a chance to verify the authenticity of the claims made by the previous management. Because of this I have removed the claim from the website whilst I carry out this investigation.

As soon as the story is clear I will make the appropriate press releases to notify the public of the complete story. It is expected that this will be done during the up coming week.

Yours Sincerely
Marko Kostyrko
CEO - FWB Software Inc

[BornAgainMac]

This looks like a copy of an interview that was over 1 year old. This product ended up being vaporware. Rumors back then suggested that there wasn't any code written yet.

[Nermal]

The new CEO actually publicly stated that no code had been written, so it wasn't a rumour.

[maradong]

This looks like a copy of an interview that was over 1 year old.
If you would mind looking at the date: "2003-04-16"

[7on]

as are most of the replies in this thread.


As I remember it MS sued RealPC for the program.