Who's Afraid of the Stevenote? Virtualization Developers Sh...

[MacBytes]

http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Opinion/Interviews
Link: Who's Afraid of the Stevenote? Virtualization Developers Should Be (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20070610000505)
Description:: none

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

[mixel]

Catch 22 if they do integrate virtualisation..

I'd like there to be some mac game development, but what will be the point if all the windows games just work. >.< (i know there'll still be some point, but greatly diminished.. Especially for the bigger houses, Aspyr etc)

Saying that, having all the windows games just work in osX *would* be great too.

I'm happy either way. I wouldn't mind apple pulling the carpet from under vmware and parallels really, I've got well worth Parallels value use over the last few months, and a more polished apple solution could be exciting.

[elppa]

Not. going. to. happen.

[mkrishnan]

*shrug*

Microsoft has delivered emulation tools... that are now, if I'm not mistaken, virtualization tools, for years. Hasn't stopped this industry from existing. I'd be happy to see what Apple comes up with. I don't have a strong feeling for whether they'll do it or not.

I do, at least, think that Apple ought to bind up a virtualizer that is capable of running past versions of OS X with at least the server version of Leopard.

[chicagdan]

Not. going. to. happen.

I don't know about that ... Jobs has a history of saying Apple will never do something and then just does it. I have a feeling that if Apple does go into this space, it's going to be with a very unique product, one that will allow Windows aps to be run without purchasing a copy of Windows. Apple's #1 strategic initiative seems to be "strangle Vista." You can see it in the advertising; in the XP, not Vista, system requirements for iPhone; in the frequent warnings for users not to upgrade to Vista if they love their iPod. I think Leopard is going to be something huge, you don't spend all this time on incremental improvements.

[flopticalcube]

Maybe Apple will just put something into Leopard to make virtualization easier (read: better) rather than the full thing?

[yamabushi]

I doubt that virtualization is going to be built in to support Windows. Apple has stated that the believe the best solution for them is dual boot. I happen to agree - dual boot is much simpler to develop and maintain and more reliable. The inconvenience of rebooting is a good thing for Apple as it keeps people using OS X as much as possible.

I would however look forward to virtualization and/or emulation built in for other operating systems and older gaming consoles. DOS, Apple DOS (Apple ][gs), Classic Mac (System), Amiga OS, and all consoles from the Atari 2600 to the PSone. Just include those that are either free or dirt cheap and can run easily on any Intel Mac. Some could be available just for PowerPC and others only available on Intel if it makes the development easier.

These might seem to be minor additions but you might be surprised how many individuals and organizations still use software designed for one or more archaic platforms. Collectively these would provide significant backwards compatibility and add new capabilities.

[daveL]

*shrug*

Microsoft has delivered emulation tools... that are now, if I'm not mistaken, virtualization tools, for years.
Really? Could you give us a reference? The only virtualization tool from MS that I'm aware of is Virtual PC, which MS bought from Connectrix (sp?) some 3 years ago. In other words, MS hasn't developed anything in this sector.

[speakerwizard]

full virtualisation would just be death of mac dev, however, apple could be clever about this and do a kinda of wine integration for a handful of apps for people to switch, (most common xp apps, outlook etc) so a switches classic mode. but not FULL virtualisation, they are not that stupid

[mkrishnan]

Really? Could you give us a reference? The only virtualization tool from MS that I'm aware of is Virtual PC, which MS bought from Connectrix (sp?) some 3 years ago. In other words, MS hasn't developed anything in this sector.

Yes, sorry, I am talking about VPC. MS has continued to develop VPC (for *Windows* now, not for OS X)... they released a 2007 version of it. They even made it free, I think? And the latest VPC, as far as I know, is a virtualization tool. All I meant is that this has not stopped third parties from continuing to develop their own virtualization technologies on top of Windows.

[nagromme]

I can't believe how much traction the Windows-in-Leopard rumor has had over the past year. Some people even believe it's certain!

I say no way, because:

1. There has been plenty of evidence--and official statements--to tell us no, and no real evidence to say yes.

2. The business sense of it is dubious at best, as many have pointed out. Better let virtualization be option for sale--like it is now.

3. Other companies (Parallels, VMWare) are already doing this quite well. There's no gaping void to fill.

[elppa]

I can't believe how much traction the Windows-in-Leopard rumor has had over the past year. Some people even believe it's certain!

I say no way, because:

1. There has been plenty of evidence--and official statements--to tell us no, and no real evidence to say yes.

2. The business sense of it is dubious at best, as many have pointed out. Better let virtualization be option for sale--like it is now.

3. Other companies (Parallels, VMWare) are already doing this quite well. There's no gaping void to fill.

Completely agree on all of the above.

The fact this keeps getting peddled out is annoying and getting in the way of real discussion on what will be new in Leopard.