PDA

View Full Version : Native MS Windows on G5!!!!!


jonapete2001
Nov 2, 2003, 01:10 AM
I recently went to the apple store in Milwaukee and asked one of the tech guys about support for virtual pc on the G5.

This is what he told me. He said that now that MS owns virtual PC and the old Virtual Pc in not supported by the G5 that MS will be porting windows over to run on the mac. He said that it will not install seperatly that the mac os but run on top of it just like virtual pc for x86. He claimed that it would be ppc native and run at full system speed because their would be no hardware emulation.

Has anyone heard this or is this apple tech just messed up in the head. I think it might be a true possibility?

FelixDerKater
Nov 2, 2003, 01:17 AM
What's the point if apps aren't recompiled to work on the PPC platform? The OS isn't everything.

mac15
Nov 2, 2003, 01:17 AM
I doubt it, who use it when you have OS X sitting there waiting?

jonapete2001
Nov 2, 2003, 01:19 AM
i don't know what the point would be. this was just the apple tech guys explanation of what he "knew" MS was going to do with virtual pc. He seemed to think that the apps would run natively. I do not compile source code so i dont know if it work or not.

i think the people that would use it are those were already using virtual pc for the g4 and g3

Sun Baked
Nov 2, 2003, 01:31 AM
There was a version of Windows NT that ran on PPC, MS killed it -- which nuked the PowerPC plaform months before it was supposed to launch. This was also weeks before Apple killed the clones.

---

Virtual PC is a virtual machine that runs on the PPC platform the past couple/few versions relied on a specific instruction that the PPC 970 does not implement -- since older copies of Virtual PC DID use this instruction, there's a good chance that Virtual PC will eventually remove the code, and optimize for the PPC 970/G4 using other methods.

[edit - just realized I said didn't instead of DID.]

iJon
Nov 2, 2003, 01:50 AM
tell that employee to put down the crack pipe.

iJon

DaYC-Ent
Nov 3, 2003, 10:15 AM
i'm not a program- or tech-savy guy, but wouldn't that make it easier/possible to play PC games on the G5? a workstation that's ahead of the rest of the market, now with the option to use a more popular OS, despite the fact that it's running 'on top' of OSX. i know the Mac already has a good selection of games, but to some PCer's that only use their pc for email and games, that might make the difference between a 'switch' and a "...what a piece of crap!" i don't agree with that logic because i'm switching regardless, but just means more sales for Apple. it'll just become more of a 'necessary-evil' for some people to deal with.
so if this salesman 'knows' anything, and it actually holds true, then Apple would just be expanding without benefit or harm. we'll just see more stupid comments in the "whats-the-stupidest-thing-a-PCer-has-ever-asked-you?" thread.

illumin8
Nov 3, 2003, 10:36 AM
Originally posted by jonapete2001
I recently went to the apple store in Milwaukee and asked one of the tech guys about support for virtual pc on the G5.

This is what he told me. He said that now that MS owns virtual PC and the old Virtual Pc in not supported by the G5 that MS will be porting windows over to run on the mac. He said that it will not install seperatly that the mac os but run on top of it just like virtual pc for x86. He claimed that it would be ppc native and run at full system speed because their would be no hardware emulation.

Has anyone heard this or is this apple tech just messed up in the head. I think it might be a true possibility?
He is full of it. Even if Windows were recompiled to run on the G5 natively, none of your Windows software would run because it's compiled for the x86. Microsoft will have to re-work large portions of VirtualPC to fix the big-endian;little-endian issues. It might take a while, but there will eventually be a version for the G5 (7.0, maybe).

Maclarny
Nov 3, 2003, 10:39 AM
I know that if Apple & Microsoft could make a dual boot OSX/Windows G5 at least 20 people I know would switch. The only thing that's holding them back they say is the gaming so if we could get a Mac that ran those games that would mean major profits for Apple.

caveman_uk
Nov 3, 2003, 10:52 AM
Originally posted by DaYC-Ent
i'm not a program- or tech-savy guy, but wouldn't that make it easier/possible to play PC games on the G5? a workstation that's ahead of the rest of the market, now with the option to use a more popular OS, despite the fact that it's running 'on top' of OSX. i know the Mac already has a good selection of games, but to some PCer's that only use their pc for email and games, that might make the difference between a 'switch' and a "...what a piece of crap!" i don't agree with that logic because i'm switching regardless, but just means more sales for Apple. it'll just become more of a 'necessary-evil' for some people to deal with.
so if this salesman 'knows' anything, and it actually holds true, then Apple would just be expanding without benefit or harm. we'll just see more stupid comments in the "whats-the-stupidest-thing-a-PCer-has-ever-asked-you?" thread.
A mac uses a completely different processor architecture and instruction set to an x86 PC. Even if windows was ported to the mac the games and apps would have to be ported as well. It would not just be a case of the same version running everywhere.

Anyway, I reckon the guy was talking out of his ass....

iJon
Nov 3, 2003, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by DaYC-Ent
i'm not a program- or tech-savy guy, but wouldn't that make it easier/possible to play PC games on the G5? a workstation that's ahead of the rest of the market, now with the option to use a more popular OS, despite the fact that it's running 'on top' of OSX. i know the Mac already has a good selection of games, but to some PCer's that only use their pc for email and games, that might make the difference between a 'switch' and a "...what a piece of crap!" i don't agree with that logic because i'm switching regardless, but just means more sales for Apple. it'll just become more of a 'necessary-evil' for some people to deal with.
so if this salesman 'knows' anything, and it actually holds true, then Apple would just be expanding without benefit or harm. we'll just see more stupid comments in the "whats-the-stupidest-thing-a-PCer-has-ever-asked-you?" thread.
even if this bogus story is true, the games would still have to be recompiled for the ppc processor.

iJon

rueyeet
Nov 3, 2003, 11:24 AM
This line shows that the tech was talking out of his ass and doesn't apparently know anthing about what emulation is for, or what running natively really implies:

Originally posted by jonapete2001
He claimed that it would be ppc native and run at full system speed because their would be no hardware emulation.

The whole point of Virtual PC's existence is to run Windows programs compiled for the x86 on PPC hardware, ie. hardware emulation. Virtual PC itself IS running natively on top of OS X, that's the whole point of it. It runs natively so that the x86 programs don't have to.

If Windows were really ported to the PPC, the apps would have to be ported too, then it's just a short hop from there to port them all to OS X and poof! Windows loses its "more programs" advantage.

And the gamers who want a dual-boot OS X/Windows G5 system sometimes don't seem to understand that this would require Windows to be ported to the PPC architecture--as a full OS, not just running on top of OS X--or OS X to be ported to the x86 architecture. Neither is likely to happen.

big
Nov 3, 2003, 11:27 AM
>>I know that if Apple & Microsoft could make a dual boot OSX/Windows G5 at least 20 people I know would switch. The only thing that's holding them back they say is the gaming so if we could get a Mac that ran those games that would mean major profits for Apple.


you used to be able to buy a PCI card or something like that and it was basically a windows chip, that you mac would just jump over to when you wanted to run windows... why that did not become more popular I do not know

toughboy
Nov 3, 2003, 11:33 AM
I dont know about architectures of processors or etc but if someone would come and say that I'll be able to play GTA3 on my 12"PB, I would be so glad that I would change my PC to an iMac even though the prices are so high in my country...

Thats all I'll say..

Nermal
Nov 4, 2003, 03:33 PM
If MS were to release a version of Windows for Mac, how complicated would it be to port the applications? I would have thought that it would be a simple recompile. If this is the case, it's possible that a future version of MS' development tools would compile to x86 and PPC at the same time (making a fat binary like the old 68K/PPC days).

Ensoniq
Nov 4, 2003, 04:26 PM
Windows will never run "natively" on the Mac for the same reason OS X will never run "natively" on Wintel machines.

The OS itself could be made to do it...Apple has a PC compatible Panther in their labs, and Microsoft may even have Windows XP running on Macintoshes in their labs. But as others have stated, that is only a tiny part of the issue.

The problem is that Mac apps are compiled to run on PPC processor instructions...and Windows apps are compiled to run on x86 instructions. Without all software developers recompiling their code for both Mac and PC versions, it doesn't matter what OS Microsoft and Apple create in their labs. Developers will never support two code-bases.

Just look at Quicken for one example. The PC and Mac versions are totally different...if it was so easy to just write the program once, and recompile for the right platform, why hasn't Intuit done it? Or Adobe? Or Symantec? Because it doesn't make sense. They write different code for different machines, and that's it.

I just don't understand how people like that Apple store tech get past Apple's screening process. :)

Bluefusion
Nov 4, 2003, 05:05 PM
Aiiiie, you people are moronic!

There's no way Microsoft would port Windows to the Mac OS, in the first place, due to the difficulty in big-endian, little-endian programming.

Second, this would destroy the Mac. Does no one see this?

"All your Windows apps will run on the Mac! Wow! Every game, even Solitaire! You can get all the advantages of Windows, with all of the advantages of the Mac underneath!... oh, wait. What were they again? A stable, trouble-free, easy to use OS? Not for any of the apps that I'm now running (all my Windows apps that I'm so happy to be able to use). A nice GUI? Not for any of the apps that I'm now running. Logical concepts and genuinely helpful error messages? Not for any of the apps that I'm now running..."

Why would anyone buy a Mac, at that point? No one would write Mac software, as "you could just run it in Windows"--and the entire purpose of the Mac is undermined. Ruined. Windows would be even more of a dominant OS, as WHO WOULD WRITE SOFTWARE for a system that not only runs on a small minority of the market, but a minority of the market that can also quickly and easily just use "what everyone else is using"?

No, we don't want this to happen. VPC costs money, and does its job efficiently, though not speedily. Once Windows gets on the Mac, the Mac OS dies. Once the Mac OS runs on PCs, Apple dies but there's a chance that OS X becomes a major player in the global market (if it runs on everything and it works right, a lot of people would use it). Both situations, however, are almost equally as bad.

Think about it a bit before you get so excited about Windows running natively. If Windows runs natively, what advantage can we use to sell Apple machines to our friends? "You can spend six times more to get a machine that's functionally identical to the one you just got rid of, but--oh, yeah--it runs this other system underneath, and it's pretty cool, but no one uses it for anything since everyone uses Windows."

Bad.

Jodge407
Nov 4, 2003, 05:23 PM
Screw Windows! I can't see the point in having Windows for the Mac. I for one would never use it. If I was having a computer that ran Mac OS on it why would I want it to run Windows and vice versa.

dornball
Nov 4, 2003, 06:09 PM
i'm a huge mac fan. i've always used macs...since i was 14.
i work in the field of architecture, which means lots, and lost of autocad, which was discontinued for the mac years ago...i think 1997.
i need windows on my mac to run autocad. that's all i run windows for...is autocad.
i wish they still did have a pci card with an intel chip on it that i could install in my mac, so icould use autocad at full speed, rather the 400Mhz-equivalent speed i get from VPC 6.1 on my dual G4 800 Mhz tower.

i agree, i don't thuink it makes sense for M$ to develop a version of windoze that runs natively on a PPC chip, but i do wish that there was som way to get a substantial speed increase over the current version of VPC.

-dornball

Bluefusion
Nov 4, 2003, 06:24 PM
For a time, Apple sold an add-on board that did this, as well as a company called Orange Micro. It ran DOS via a hardware level abstract (HAL), on an external (in this case internal) daughtercard.

Apple also sold the Quadra 610 DOS Compatible.

Either option would be vastly better for Apple or third parties to persue (especially with PCI-X on the G5) than Windows specifically for the Mac OS, which would be a nightmare for Apple's system (see my long post above).

big
Nov 4, 2003, 10:57 PM
> dornball

you shoul dlook into ENGSW.com, a beautiful app called PowerCadd. It is the easiest to learn (and cheapest) CAD software out there. I use it to design structures from single rooms additions to whole towns!

DaYC-Ent
Nov 5, 2003, 06:43 AM
ok, i'm a soon-to-be switcher, and i did a search on this but came up with nothing useful.
can someone explain this whole 'big-endian, little-endian' thing? or point me in the right direction?
and just for clarification, i'm assuming that PPC is the stucture for the apple chip? meaning different circuitry layout, different logic setup, meaning different 'thinking' altogether from a x86?? i used to be an radar/electronics tech for the Navy, but our equipment was BEFORE solid state devices. (and i just got out this year!)

jonapete2001
Nov 5, 2003, 06:49 AM
big endian vs. little endian. If i can explain is simply. Code is compiled in 2 different ways(many but 2 that deal with endian). Big ended code is read from the larger end of the code(the end with the highest value). Little ended code is read from start of the code or the smaller end. PPC reads code one way and x86 reads code from the other way. This is why currently windows is incompatible with PPC(one reason). and mac os is not compatible with x86 hardware(again one of many reasons)

rainman::|:|
Nov 5, 2003, 07:41 AM
yes, microsoft fired a guy for taking a picture of the end of their loading dock, a stack of G5s, and some trees; but they told this guy about their plans to port Windows and let him run around telling everyone he wants. makes sense to me.

:rolleyes:

pnw

DaYC-Ent
Nov 5, 2003, 07:45 AM
so am i reading this right that Mac reads X-endian, and windows reads Y-endian? X & Y being whatever the appropriate is.
kind of like how we read a book left to right, top to bottom with the spine on the left, but Japanese read top to bottom, right to left, spine on the right...
cool. now i understand somewhat.

Spock
Nov 5, 2003, 08:21 AM
Who runs Apple? Do You really think Steve would let Microsoft put Windows on his baby?

DaYC-Ent
Nov 5, 2003, 08:24 AM
my last stupid question... (for this thread, at least)

Who is Steve?

...wait, nevermind. my coffee kicked in.

jonapete2001
Nov 5, 2003, 09:25 AM
Originally posted by Spock
Who runs Apple? Do You really think Steve would let Microsoft put Windows on his baby?

i doubt this is a true rumor, but stever jobs would have no say in the matter. If Bill Gates wanted to create windows for mac he could. All he would have to do is create and ship the disk. just like linux for mac. There are many distros of linux that run natively on mac, steve has no control of what people install on THIER system.

If you meant would it be factory installed at the apple plant, no steve would not allow this, but that is the extent of his control over a purchased computer.

SiliconAddict
Nov 5, 2003, 11:52 AM
Originally posted by jonapete2001


This is what he told me. He said that now that MS owns virtual PC and the old Virtual Pc in not supported by the G5 that MS will be porting windows over to run on the mac. He said that it will not install seperatly that the mac os but run on top of it just like virtual pc for x86. He claimed that it would be ppc native and run at full system speed because their would be no hardware emulation.

Has anyone heard this or is this apple tech just messed up in the head. I think it might be a true possibility?

I think your tech was on crack. MS is tightly designed around the i386 instruction set and even more tightly designed around intel's CPU's (Don't think AMD ain't fuming about that.) It would be a monumental effort to redesign windows and then have every app ever created for windows recompiled all in the name of pleasing, what?, 2-3% market share. Not going to happen. The amount of effort involved would be way higher then just redoing VPC to be compatible with the G5

Then again I may be wrong.....
.
.
.
.
.
.
He was full of something else not crack. :D

SiliconAddict
Nov 5, 2003, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by Spock
Who runs Apple? Do You really think Steve would let Microsoft put Windows on his baby?

jonapete2001 is right. Apple has no say in what OS I load onto the hardware just like Dell, Gateway, or IBM has any say. Even if I was in any contractual agreement I can just about guarantee that there is no way in hell it would stand up in court. Unlike the OS where you don't actually own the code the hardware is yours to do with as you please. If you want to install Windows, why? , you can.