Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple considering Marklar?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh no, not the WINE on OSX speculation again.
WINE isn't stable or complete enough to run Windows apps reliably even though they've done a great job of reverse-engineering he code.
So no WINE for you!
Excusez-moi. I'd like to say the contrary. I've been running WINE over the past few months and only recently did it get very good. I was able to run Microsoft Office, Internet Explorer, a couple of Windows-only games. It definitely has gotten a lot better. But of course, there are several horribly written Win32 applications that refuse to be run under WINE. So, it's an YMMV experience.
First off, the next release will be Office 11, dubbed by many Office .NET. Office XP is Office 10. There are quite a few Office 11 beta testers who are running it on Windows XP. And as far as using Longhorn, I've had no problems running current third party applications.Originally posted by hobie
So where is your base? You're right that Office 11 will only run under 2000 and XP. But the next release (Office 12) won't anymore. Longhorn is the only option Office 12 users will get then. Just because MS plans to put a whole new core under the hood together with a new filesystem (I've heard something of Unix like)
Second, the filesystem is no way Unix-like. It will be based on Microsoft's SQL Server .NET. And as others have said, Longhorn is still NT, versioned 6.0.
So, since you have a company that actually supports their products by upgrading their drivers, you didn't upgrade? Have you even tried to install it? If not, then perhaps you're slightly naive- just looking at one sony notebook (the picturebook), almost 100% of those drivers come with standard windows versions, and sony has updated versions of the drivers to support their "proprietary" features. Considering that a memory stick drive and jog dial aren't exactly standard features, I wouldn't expect them to come with native drivers in XP since Microsoft doesn't write drivers for those, sony does.
What you see on the Sony support page is no different than Logitech not including the Mouseware software in either Windows or Mac OS, or, in the case of something like the video driver, OS X/XP providing basic CD authoring and burning support over something like Toast. It's Microsoft's job to provide functionality, it's sony's job to enable the features of their notebooks.
I stand corrected then.
What version are you running?
WineX is supposed to be the best for games and a few apps, but as far along as it may be, WINE still isn't an option for many users since it isn't even close to flawless yet.
Yeah right. Microsoft won't even support the "open" mpeg-4 standard. Why ever would they embrace a completely open AND free operating system like Linux? That's completely contrary to any of their past or current business practices.
But I'll admit, it surely would be funny!
But I'll admit, it surely would be funny!
If Palladium and such are going to piss off so many people, they just might buy Macs anyway. More money for Apple! As long as Senator Fritzler Hollings doesn't get involved, Palladium has no chance to survive, make your time. Unfortunately, it is just that that may cause Adolf Fritzler to get involved.
If enough people buy Macs, IBM just might be able to overtake Intel and AMD in processor speed because of all the money they'll make. Apple's market share will grow, MS/Intel will suffer and be forced to abandon Palladium, and everyone, except Microsoft and Intel for being idiots in the first place, will be in happy land. Unless, of course, Fritzler gets his way.
If enough people buy Macs, IBM just might be able to overtake Intel and AMD in processor speed because of all the money they'll make. Apple's market share will grow, MS/Intel will suffer and be forced to abandon Palladium, and everyone, except Microsoft and Intel for being idiots in the first place, will be in happy land. Unless, of course, Fritzler gets his way.
Originally posted by peteMG
It is belong to us.
Ah...humor! How I've missed you so from these boards.
The problem with that is that not everybody knows about Pallidium and what it can and can't do.
[hypothetical...sorta]MS is most definately not going to advertise the restrictions that Pallidium places on it's users.
What they are going to advertise is things like 'new innovative media functionality' or 'increased stability/security' or 'more user freindly'[/hypothetical...sorta]
Most people aren't going to extensively research Pallidium like people here have, they're going to look at the features and the price when they go shopping for a new computer.
[hypothetical...sorta]Now those unsuspecting consumers buy that Pallidium machine and they download some unnapproved music files (let's make them legal, just not Pallidium approved for sake of argument) then they want to burn them onto a CD and play it in their car but when they go to do that, Pallidium warns them that those files are not approved and while it tells you that you may continue if you want, it will also warn you that all security features will be disabled if you continue. A window pops up that says 'It is not recommended you continue because security will be compromised if you do'
The consumer looks at the screen and says 'WTF?!? All I want to do is furn a CD and my computer's security will be compromised if I do??'
The consumer is now pissed and goes to his/her local computer store to ask some questions about it. He/she then sees an ad for 'The Multimedia OS' .
Interested, the consumer then walks over to the aisle where it is being sold, looks at the box and it says: 'OSX for PC, built from the ground up as a multimedia OS, just install this and you will be free to do with your digital media what you want!'
Consumer buys it, goes home and installls it. It saves all the media files from the previous OS. Consumer is now impressed that they have a gorgeous OS that does what they want it to do.
Problem solved.[/hypothetical...sorta]
Note: all of the above is purely hypothetical and possibly wrong based off of my understanding of how Pallidium works.
Let's let that same event happen again, up to the point where he sees an ad for Mac OS X for x86. If he sees an ad for Mac advertising this, he knows that a Mac is what he wants, and he will try and RETURN his PC for a refund and get a Mac instead. If he can't, he'll just get a Mac next time. Quality is thus controlled by Apple.
And while MS may not advertise the restrictions Palladium will cause, what makes you think Apple won't?
"Windows won't let me burn CDs. It's kind of...a bummer."
And while MS may not advertise the restrictions Palladium will cause, what makes you think Apple won't?
"Windows won't let me burn CDs. It's kind of...a bummer."
Apple needs to get smarter with their marketing if they ever expect a mass exodus of users from the Windows world. Simply showing a bunch of patronizing commercials about how easy Macs are to use isn't going to cut it. It almost makes it seem like Macs are only for computer illiterate people. I don't think there are really that many people anymore who don't know how to use a PC.
Apple needs to start showing a side by side comparison in gigaflops between Macs and PC's, inform consumers that products like Virtual PC will allow them to continue using their old PC programs, and emphasize the stability of OS X.
If a PC user only understands speed based on MHz, why should they shell out $2,000 to $3,000 for a new Mac that appears to be much slower than a PC? None of the Apple commercials ever offer any explanation for the slower frequency of the PowerPC.
If a PC user has been doing a significant portion of their work on a PC-only program, how quickly will they be willing to jump into an OS that they believe will not allow them to at least temporarily continue their work until they can find a comparable program for OS X? What will the PC user do if some time down the road their employer or a class that they're taking in school requires them to use a PC-only program to do a portion of their work? Apple doesn't advertise the ability of programs like Virtual PC to take care of all these problems and allow Windows XP to run on a stable virtual hard drive that can be restored anytime Windows screws it up.
The one thing that PC users all seem to understand is that Windows crashes ALOT. It may be fairly easy to use, and cheap to buy, but it's very unreliable and annoying. More Apple commercials emphasizing the stability of OS X would be wise.
These ideas might sway a large number of PC users over to the Mac side. Otherwise, only a test drive of the OS on a PC would probably convince large numbers of PC users to spend the extra money on a Mac that in their eyes is expensive, slow, and incompatible with most of the world. (not stating actual characteristics of Macs, only stating misperceptions held by many PC users)
Apple needs to start showing a side by side comparison in gigaflops between Macs and PC's, inform consumers that products like Virtual PC will allow them to continue using their old PC programs, and emphasize the stability of OS X.
If a PC user only understands speed based on MHz, why should they shell out $2,000 to $3,000 for a new Mac that appears to be much slower than a PC? None of the Apple commercials ever offer any explanation for the slower frequency of the PowerPC.
If a PC user has been doing a significant portion of their work on a PC-only program, how quickly will they be willing to jump into an OS that they believe will not allow them to at least temporarily continue their work until they can find a comparable program for OS X? What will the PC user do if some time down the road their employer or a class that they're taking in school requires them to use a PC-only program to do a portion of their work? Apple doesn't advertise the ability of programs like Virtual PC to take care of all these problems and allow Windows XP to run on a stable virtual hard drive that can be restored anytime Windows screws it up.
The one thing that PC users all seem to understand is that Windows crashes ALOT. It may be fairly easy to use, and cheap to buy, but it's very unreliable and annoying. More Apple commercials emphasizing the stability of OS X would be wise.
These ideas might sway a large number of PC users over to the Mac side. Otherwise, only a test drive of the OS on a PC would probably convince large numbers of PC users to spend the extra money on a Mac that in their eyes is expensive, slow, and incompatible with most of the world. (not stating actual characteristics of Macs, only stating misperceptions held by many PC users)
this is fun!
Well what if Apple's are still more expensive and slower by then?
I for one would not like to trade my brand new computer which is well-built, speedy and reasonably priced for a more expensive one which uses similar parts and is a slower performer when I can just pay $129 and get the same experience on the computer I already own.
If Macs were priced/performed to PC's reasonably then there would be no problem, but I'm just saying if their hardware isn't up to speed by then.
And what happens if they can't get a refund?
They just spent say $1500 on a brand new computer and it sits there in the bedroom doing nothing because nothing you can do on it is Pallidium approved, no extra money to buy another computer since all of the savings were spent on that one, but just enough saved for a new OS.
I'm sure they will, but will it be enough is the question.
A lot of PCs that are sold are under the $1000 mark, some way below.
Apple only has two machines that are below that and only marginal at that.
Many people just can't afford a more expensive computer and if those people want a brand new computer, but they can't pay more than $800 for it, then Apple is out of the question unless they sell a seperate OS.
I'm skeptical about Marklar and it's alledged purpose as well, it's just fun to speculate.
Well what if Apple's are still more expensive and slower by then?
I for one would not like to trade my brand new computer which is well-built, speedy and reasonably priced for a more expensive one which uses similar parts and is a slower performer when I can just pay $129 and get the same experience on the computer I already own.
If Macs were priced/performed to PC's reasonably then there would be no problem, but I'm just saying if their hardware isn't up to speed by then.
And what happens if they can't get a refund?
They just spent say $1500 on a brand new computer and it sits there in the bedroom doing nothing because nothing you can do on it is Pallidium approved, no extra money to buy another computer since all of the savings were spent on that one, but just enough saved for a new OS.
I'm sure they will, but will it be enough is the question.
A lot of PCs that are sold are under the $1000 mark, some way below.
Apple only has two machines that are below that and only marginal at that.
Many people just can't afford a more expensive computer and if those people want a brand new computer, but they can't pay more than $800 for it, then Apple is out of the question unless they sell a seperate OS.
I'm skeptical about Marklar and it's alledged purpose as well, it's just fun to speculate.
If you could buy Mac OS X for Intel, of course you wouldn't buy a Mac! But if you couldn't, you'd HAVE to buy a Mac, and you would.
Why does OSX for x86 automatically make people not want to buy Macs?
A lot of people just like the looks of them, no PC maker has even come close to duplicating the iMac's looks and usability (hardware) alone have been major selling points of Apple products past present and future.
The iBook is currently one of the best deals you can get on a laptop right now, not because of software, but because it's one of the only sub $1400 slim notebooks with a good footprint, an internal DVD/CD-RW drive and 32MB of RAM all under 5 pounds, not to mention a great battery life.
The Tibook is no doubt a sexy machine, it practically sells itself, again not because of the software that's on it, but because people drool at the looks of a 1-inch thick laptop with a gorgous screen and partly made of titanium and an internal DVD-burner!!
How about the Powermac?
One of the single best case designs I have ever seen, just flip a latch and you can add or remove enything you want.
There are plenty of people that are willing to pay a premium to have an actual Apple machine on their desk, I'm one of them (or I would be if I could afford a new one) so I don't think Marklar would stop those people which seem to make up most of their sales.
Just because you have the ability to play software designed for a different machine on your current computer, does not mean that you will be disuaded from purchasing the machine that it was designed to operate on.
There are plenty of Playstation emulators and Dreamcast emulators, etc available to the public, but they don't prevent people from buying the real thing. If anything, they encourage it.
If it's really that big of a deal, make the PC version of OS X unusable after a 90 day period or disable the ability to use printers and any other peripheral devices on the x86 version.
Sure, porting OS X for use on PC's is risky, but risk is part of any company's plan to broaden their market and their level of competition.
If people begin switching in droves to Mac's, Apple hardware prices will drop significantly, and the better designed Apple hardware will sell like hotcakes. What other computer hardware allows you to use multiple processors in parallel? What other computer hardware allows you to multi-task without significant slowdown? Marklar is an awesome opportunity for Apple to reach out to PC users, as long as Apple is careful about how they choose to go about releasing it.
There are plenty of Playstation emulators and Dreamcast emulators, etc available to the public, but they don't prevent people from buying the real thing. If anything, they encourage it.
If it's really that big of a deal, make the PC version of OS X unusable after a 90 day period or disable the ability to use printers and any other peripheral devices on the x86 version.
Sure, porting OS X for use on PC's is risky, but risk is part of any company's plan to broaden their market and their level of competition.
If people begin switching in droves to Mac's, Apple hardware prices will drop significantly, and the better designed Apple hardware will sell like hotcakes. What other computer hardware allows you to use multiple processors in parallel? What other computer hardware allows you to multi-task without significant slowdown? Marklar is an awesome opportunity for Apple to reach out to PC users, as long as Apple is careful about how they choose to go about releasing it.
Re: this is fun!
I said that you wouldn't buy a Mac if you could buy OS X for Intel in response to this, and I assumed, in context to this. I was simply repeating what you said and added to it. But if you wanted to contradict yourself just for the sake of adding to the argument, I'll admit that you do have a point.
Originally posted by edvniow
Well what if Apple's are still more expensive and slower by then?
I for one would not like to trade my brand new computer which is well-built, speedy and reasonably priced for a more expensive one which uses similar parts and is a slower performer when I can just pay $129 and get the same experience on the computer I already own.
If Macs were priced/performed to PC's reasonably then there would be no problem, but I'm just saying if their hardware isn't up to speed by then.
And what happens if they can't get a refund?
They just spent say $1500 on a brand new computer and it sits there in the bedroom doing nothing because nothing you can do on it is Pallidium approved, no extra money to buy another computer since all of the savings were spent on that one, but just enough saved for a new OS.
I'm sure they will, but will it be enough is the question.
A lot of PCs that are sold are under the $1000 mark, some way below.
Apple only has two machines that are below that and only marginal at that.
Many people just can't afford a more expensive computer and if those people want a brand new computer, but they can't pay more than $800 for it, then Apple is out of the question unless they sell a seperate OS.
I'm skeptical about Marklar and it's alledged purpose as well, it's just fun to speculate.
I said that you wouldn't buy a Mac if you could buy OS X for Intel in response to this, and I assumed, in context to this. I was simply repeating what you said and added to it. But if you wanted to contradict yourself just for the sake of adding to the argument, I'll admit that you do have a point.
So, since you have a company that actually supports their products by upgrading their drivers, you didn't upgrade? Have you even tried to install it? If not, then perhaps you're slightly naive- just looking at one sony notebook (the picturebook), almost 100% of those drivers come with standard windows versions, and sony has updated versions of the drivers to support their "proprietary" features. Considering that a memory stick drive and jog dial aren't exactly standard features, I wouldn't expect them to come with native drivers in XP since Microsoft doesn't write drivers for those, sony does.
What you see on the Sony support page is no different than Logitech not including the Mouseware software in either Windows or Mac OS, or, in the case of something like the video driver, OS X/XP providing basic CD authoring and burning support over something like Toast. It's Microsoft's job to provide functionality, it's sony's job to enable the features of their notebooks.
My original comment was an answer to someone asking about driver incompatibility between Win2K and XP. It is good that Sony supports the upgrade but the process (if you look) is quite onerous. The computer is supposed to help me do work and save time, not me waste time to help it do work.
But thanks for reminding me and pointing out another reason why OS X for x86 is nonsense. PCs are all different and most have proprietary parts piled atop all kinds of different "guts". Getting an OS that will work with all of them is a challenge that Microsoft is still unable to master. Also, in reference to this example, the Sony notebook won't boot with non-Sony optical drives so upgrading is a painful experience. Likewise, common device drivers failed out of the box! These problems aren't Microsoft's fault but it exemplifies life in the world of Peecee. Part of the beauty of Apple is everything DOES work without tinkering. To upgrade to OS X all I had to do was slip in a CD.
What you see on the Sony support page is no different than Logitech not including the Mouseware software in either Windows or Mac OS, or, in the case of something like the video driver, OS X/XP providing basic CD authoring and burning support over something like Toast. It's Microsoft's job to provide functionality, it's sony's job to enable the features of their notebooks.
My original comment was an answer to someone asking about driver incompatibility between Win2K and XP. It is good that Sony supports the upgrade but the process (if you look) is quite onerous. The computer is supposed to help me do work and save time, not me waste time to help it do work.
But thanks for reminding me and pointing out another reason why OS X for x86 is nonsense. PCs are all different and most have proprietary parts piled atop all kinds of different "guts". Getting an OS that will work with all of them is a challenge that Microsoft is still unable to master. Also, in reference to this example, the Sony notebook won't boot with non-Sony optical drives so upgrading is a painful experience. Likewise, common device drivers failed out of the box! These problems aren't Microsoft's fault but it exemplifies life in the world of Peecee. Part of the beauty of Apple is everything DOES work without tinkering. To upgrade to OS X all I had to do was slip in a CD.
I don't quite understand all this talk about massive amounts of time invested in searching for compatible drivers for the unpredictable assortment of parts inside the average PC. PC's do not really vary all that much when looking at different machines from different manufacturers. You have the same basic motherboard setup, the same basic x86 chip, and the same basic assortment of optional PC cards. Even if you choose to purchase some obscure sound or video card, that for some reason is behind the times and does not yet have drivers for Windows XP, the generic windows sound and video drivers work quite well.
Usually each time Microsoft updates their operating system, it includes the majority of the latest hardware drivers. Just as you described for the Mac, all you have to do is insert the Windows update CD, and the installation application does the rest.
If the new OS update does not include a new driver for your scanner or printer, the scanner or printer website usually has a new driver only a couple of clicks away. Strangely enough, however, I've had to do more searching for more drivers on my Mac than I ever did with my PC. There are still alot of hardware vendors who may not even choose to provide drivers for OS X. Every time I make a hardware purchase, I have to do research to make sure that it will have drivers available for Mac.
As long as the x86 version of OS X were able to include generic drivers for the PC internals (as Windows does) and/or was able to automatically download the driver from the associated vendors webpage (maybe by scanning the existing PC configuration) I don't really see the problem. Finding the drivers you need is not that hard. Besides, it's the PC users who are familiar with this "jumble of hardware" to begin with.
Usually each time Microsoft updates their operating system, it includes the majority of the latest hardware drivers. Just as you described for the Mac, all you have to do is insert the Windows update CD, and the installation application does the rest.
If the new OS update does not include a new driver for your scanner or printer, the scanner or printer website usually has a new driver only a couple of clicks away. Strangely enough, however, I've had to do more searching for more drivers on my Mac than I ever did with my PC. There are still alot of hardware vendors who may not even choose to provide drivers for OS X. Every time I make a hardware purchase, I have to do research to make sure that it will have drivers available for Mac.
As long as the x86 version of OS X were able to include generic drivers for the PC internals (as Windows does) and/or was able to automatically download the driver from the associated vendors webpage (maybe by scanning the existing PC configuration) I don't really see the problem. Finding the drivers you need is not that hard. Besides, it's the PC users who are familiar with this "jumble of hardware" to begin with.
Windows unstable condition doesn't generally have anything to do with driver problems. It's tendency to crash is because it is written with outdated code that has trouble handling exception errors.
I don't quite understand all this talk about massive amounts of time invested in searching for compatible drivers for the unpredictable assortment of parts inside the average PC. PC's do not really vary all that much when looking at different machines from different manufacturers. You have the same basic motherboard setup, the same basic x86 chip, and the same basic assortment of optional PC cards.
Maybe I am lucky, but I am yet to have any trouble with Mac stuff (I have a cube, G4 tower, TiPB). However, my experience with PeeCee has been grim (various Dells and Sonys). A new Dell machine of mine wouldn't run Diablo II apparently because the Intel motherboard was incompatible. I've got dozens of examples where a PC program or device experiences what seems to be random conflicts or bizarre errors (like my Sony refuses to activate its ethernet card that came built-in). I know a lot of IT geeks and most of them are amazed that PeeCees work at all.
The only reason MOST people stick with Peecee is that they are afraid to leave it. Why offer a flimsy reason (Marklar) to stay with Peecee?
Maybe I am lucky, but I am yet to have any trouble with Mac stuff (I have a cube, G4 tower, TiPB). However, my experience with PeeCee has been grim (various Dells and Sonys). A new Dell machine of mine wouldn't run Diablo II apparently because the Intel motherboard was incompatible. I've got dozens of examples where a PC program or device experiences what seems to be random conflicts or bizarre errors (like my Sony refuses to activate its ethernet card that came built-in). I know a lot of IT geeks and most of them are amazed that PeeCees work at all.
The only reason MOST people stick with Peecee is that they are afraid to leave it. Why offer a flimsy reason (Marklar) to stay with Peecee?
I guess I have been fairly lucky with my PC's. I assembled most of them, so I made sure that I chose quality hardware. The only driver related problem I ever had concerned the game "Full Throttle". For some reason it would not allow me to use a game controller card that was seperate from my sound card. It turned out to be a problem with the way that the game was coded rather than an actual driver problem.
The only reason MOST people stick with Peecee is that they are afraid to leave it. Why offer a flimsy reason (Marklar) to stay with Peecee?
I understand the point that people are trying to make when they say this, especially since it's a possibility that a limited functionality version of Marklar could be reverse-engineered to make fully-functional versions. I still believe, however, that Marklar would do more to rid PC users of the fear of leaving the PC rather than reinforce that fear. The fear of leaving the PC is based on the compatiblity of the OS with the rest of the world, not because of any special love for the hardware itself. Apple is the only company that really attracts users with its hardware.
The only reason MOST people stick with Peecee is that they are afraid to leave it. Why offer a flimsy reason (Marklar) to stay with Peecee?
I understand the point that people are trying to make when they say this, especially since it's a possibility that a limited functionality version of Marklar could be reverse-engineered to make fully-functional versions. I still believe, however, that Marklar would do more to rid PC users of the fear of leaving the PC rather than reinforce that fear. The fear of leaving the PC is based on the compatiblity of the OS with the rest of the world, not because of any special love for the hardware itself. Apple is the only company that really attracts users with its hardware.
I don't quite understand all this talk about massive amounts of time invested in searching for compatible drivers for the unpredictable assortment of parts inside the average PC. PC's do not really vary all that much when looking at different machines from different manufacturers. You have the same basic motherboard setup, the same basic x86 chip, and the same basic assortment of optional PC cards.
Maybe I am lucky, but I am yet to have any trouble with Mac stuff (I have a cube, G4 tower, TiPB). However, my experience with PeeCee has been grim (various Dells and Sonys). A new Dell machine of mine wouldn't run Diablo II apparently because the Intel motherboard was incompatible. I've got dozens of examples where a PC program or device experiences what seems to be random conflicts or bizarre errors (like my Sony refuses to activate its ethernet card that came built-in). I know a lot of IT geeks and most of them are amazed that PeeCees work at all.
The only reason MOST people stick with Peecee is that they are afraid to leave it. Why offer a flimsy reason (Marklar) to stay with Peecee?
Maybe I am lucky, but I am yet to have any trouble with Mac stuff (I have a cube, G4 tower, TiPB). However, my experience with PeeCee has been grim (various Dells and Sonys). A new Dell machine of mine wouldn't run Diablo II apparently because the Intel motherboard was incompatible. I've got dozens of examples where a PC program or device experiences what seems to be random conflicts or bizarre errors (like my Sony refuses to activate its ethernet card that came built-in). I know a lot of IT geeks and most of them are amazed that PeeCees work at all.
The only reason MOST people stick with Peecee is that they are afraid to leave it. Why offer a flimsy reason (Marklar) to stay with Peecee?
Perhaps the driver issues could be used to Apple's advantage. Produce a version of Marklar that only includes a set of generic drivers. All advanced hardware features would only be available on the full version of OS X available only on Mac computers. Program in dialog boxes that remind the user when appropriate that they would have this extra functionality if they purchase a Mac which has hardware and software perfectly intertwined.
Apple could also refrain from including any support whatsoever for peripherals such as printers or scanners. This would allow PC users to experience the stability and elegance of OS X while at the same time forcing them to purchase the real thing in order to really do anything productive with it.
Apple could also refrain from including any support whatsoever for peripherals such as printers or scanners. This would allow PC users to experience the stability and elegance of OS X while at the same time forcing them to purchase the real thing in order to really do anything productive with it.