Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Leopard to Include Virtualization Software?

I get confused between emulation and virtualization. Doesn't virtualization here mean that one could run exe files without the Windows OS?

If so, why on earth would Microsoft help? They want people to buy Virtual PC and a Windows license.
 
blasto333 said:
I don't see it happening. It is almost like saying "Our OS can't do everything, so we are providing a solution for you to install other operating systems." I don't think Apple thinks like that. If it happens I will be very surprised.

Anyways, I am very happy with the dual boot, it works perfect. (I have an intel iMac 20'.)
Click to expand...


The market is there for it, and Microsoft has a very clear philosophy....the more PCs that can run Windows, the better. Apple has been pretty clear on their stance too, "they won't disallow it"...because they know they're going to sell more Apple PCs as a result....
 
Before we get in over our heads talking about how Apple could make it easy to run MS apps on their desktops, let's first remember that Apple also sells servers.

Virtualization is a big deal in the server industry. It allows things like mail and web servers to be run in safe areas (sometimes called "sandboxes", "jails", or "zones") where they can crash without affecting any other apps on the system.

I'm not familiar with Apple's current server products, but this new rumor about virtualization technology could be nothing more than a new implementation meant for server use. It might even just mean that they're doing a lot of work to bring the same type of virtualization to the desktop (so every app you run is safe from every other app).

I'd hesitate before getting too used to the idea of simple Windows-Mac integration - even though this is a rumor site. ;)
 
timswim78 said:
Sounds pretty cool for people that need Windows applications. Its a much better solution than trying to setup a dual boot Intel OS X / Windows system.
Click to expand...

The dual boot idea doesn't do much for me, but I like the idea of running Windows applications natively on my Mac. I guess the only difference is whether you're seeing the XP/Vista "guts," i.e., the UI, Windows-specific preferences, etc.
 
Another thing...

If Apple does this, Microsoft will totally turn around and do virtualization of Mac programs (namely, iLife).

iPhoto and iMovie will be torrented from here to high heaven!

That said, it does seem like virtualization is inevitable... seems that the positives would outweigh the negatives.
 
Apple

Knowing their current record they will find a way to emulate windows at 115% native speed!!!:rolleyes:







Cant a man dream!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:D :D
 
Virtualization still requires the Guest OS installed. The difference is that Emulation requires the CPU/Bios etc to be emulated by the Host CPU. Qemu is an example of an Emulation.
Virtualization sends the CPU calls directly to the host CPU to handle. This is faster then emulation as the CPU is able to handle the intructions natively.
 
colin6969 said:
This is virtualization, not emulation. Emulation includes the machine code translation of PPC <--> intel. (PPC is what's called "Big Endian", where intel uses "Little Endian" byte ordering systems)

Since the new intel Macs are "little endian", virtualization software can be developed to essentially run near-native x86 OSes (like windows) within OSX. No machine-code translation (emulation) required.

Depending on how far they take it...and if they optimally virtualize the graphics drivers...even Windows games will become runable via Virtualization software.

If this is the case for Leopard...this is definitely what I'm waiting for to get an intel mac.
Click to expand...

Another thought could be that Steve is thinking from a selling point running Windows would mean he could sell more hardware... but he's not going to let Windows have free reign so they decide to build a shell (like VPC) to run Windows in. That way when Windows crashes it won't affect OS X and any other part of the system.
 
Thataboy said:
I get confused between emulation and virtualization. Doesn't virtualization here mean that one could run exe files without the Windows OS?

If so, why on earth would Microsoft help? They want people to buy Virtual PC and a Windows license.
Click to expand...

Good question. Back in the day, some virtualization systems allow you to basically "run an exe" like you're suggesting (but it the background it's literally launching the virtual environment....think OS9 support in OSX)....but we're probably talking about something similar to the current VirtualPC software...just with no emulation.
 
One thing that would be interesting for this Virtualization is to run Mutiple instances of OSX or OSX Server. It would be a great tool for testing without having to potentially screw up your OSX install.
 
Thataboy said:
Another thing...

If Apple does this, Microsoft will totally turn around and do virtualization of Mac programs (namely, iLife).

iPhoto and iMovie will be torrented from here to high heaven!

That said, it does seem like virtualization is inevitable... seems that the positives would outweigh the negatives.
Click to expand...

Another good question, thataboy. Don't count on it. Apple has publicly stated that they will 'rigorously disallow' OSX to be run on anything other than a Mac. Virtualizing OSX within a Windows OS would be technically doing this.

That's not to say someone clever couldn't virtualize a near a near perfect hardware spec of a mac and load OSX on it......you're diving into an unsupported land though...
 
blasto333 said:
I don't see it happening. It is almost like saying "Our OS can't do everything, so we are providing a solution for you to install other operating systems." I don't think Apple thinks like that. If it happens I will be very surprised.

Anyways, I am very happy with the dual boot, it works perfect. (I have an intel iMac 20'.)
Click to expand...

It looks to me more like Apple saying, 'Go ahead, compare Windows to Mac OS side by side and see which one you end up using more and more... Mac OS.'

It also sends a clear message to computer buyers. Which machine would you buy? A Dell that runs Windows? Or a Mac that runs Mac OS and Windows? I'd buy the machine that has suddenly become the most universal platform to run any consumer and business application. Wouldn't you?

Edit: And don't think that Apple would do something like that without holding something to their advantage. Perhaps they'll lock Windows out from accessing things like the core fuctions or the second core of the processor. Telling software developers that they'd better program in Universal Binary if they want to take full advantage of the systems power.
 
It just wouldn't work with PPC

Shamus said:
The article specifies Intel chips though, so would they disable the feature on PowerPC based releases of the OS?
Click to expand...
The newest Intel chips contain special features and instructions to make virtualization faster and easier than the way that traditional packages like VMware and VPC(x86) had to implement it. (But those products are changing to exploit the new features in the future.)

The PowerPC doesn't have those Intel-specific features, and isn't able to execute the Intel instructions directly. You'd need a completely different solution that ran in OSX on the PPC, and emulated a complete Intel system.

Oh wait - that already exists, and it's called Virtual PC for Mac. ;)
_________________________

So, it's not a matter of "disabling" the feature for PPC - it just wouldn't work.
 
AeronPrometheus said:
It looks to me more like Apple saying, 'Go ahead, compare Windows to Mac OS side by side and see which one you end up using more and more... Mac OS.'
Click to expand...

I completely agree. I switched to Mac a couple of years back because I liked the hardware. I now realise how good OSX is. This is great news for all those possible switchers who are a bit worried about leaving Windows for ever.
 
blasto333 said:
I don't see it happening. It is almost like saying "Our OS can't do everything, so we are providing a solution for you to install other operating systems." I don't think Apple thinks like that. If it happens I will be very surprised.

Anyways, I am very happy with the dual boot, it works perfect. (I have an intel iMac 20'.)
Click to expand...


Or Apple could say, Our computers can do everything, they can even run Windows apps.
 
Has anyone else noticed this technology is codenamed Chameleon and that is going to be part of Leopard.

A chameleon can change its colour on the fly, similiar maybe to a Mac changing the OS it is running on the fly.;)

Chameleon, Leopard (Mac OS X), Windows.

Maybe a Leopard can change its spots after all.:p ;)
 
AeronPrometheus said:
It looks to me more like Apple saying, 'Go ahead, compare Windows to Mac OS side by side and see which one you end up using more and more... Mac OS.'

It also sends a clear message to computer buyers. Which machine would you buy? A Dell that runs Windows? Or a Mac that runs Mac OS and Windows? I'd buy the machine that has suddenly become the most universal platform to run any consumer and business application. Wouldn't you?

Edit: And don't think that Apple would do something like that without holding something to their advantage. Perhaps they'll lock Windows out from accessing things like the core fuctions or the second core of the processor. Telling software developers that they'd better program in Universal Binary if they want to take full advantage of the systems power.
Click to expand...


IBM took that route with... what was it called again? Oh, ye.. OS2Warp.

I really thing virualization is a nice idea for servers and lab testing envorinments, but currently for the real consumer world there is little use. Apple shouldn't make it to easy to run windows side my side wiht the mac os, IBM allowed that by allowing warp users to run windows apps inside warp, end result was that all the apps were windows apps and nobody really developed warp apps. While I know its not exactly a apples to apples comparison i think the point im trying to make holds.
 
It's not "either" - it can be both.

jamin said:
Virtualization still requires the Guest OS installed. The difference is that Emulation requires the CPU/Bios etc to be emulated by the Host CPU. Qemu is an example of an Emulation.

Virtualization sends the CPU calls directly to the host CPU to handle. This is faster then emulation as the CPU is able to handle the intructions natively.
Click to expand...
Virtualization and emulation are not mutually-exclusive.

Virtual PC for Mac provides a virtual computer environment, and emulates the ISA of an x86 processor.

Virtual PC for Windows provides a virtual computer environment, and lets the processor execute the instructions natively without (much) emulation. (VMware, Xen and Virtual Server also do this.)
_________________

"Virtualization still requires the Guest OS installed." This is a good distinction.

WINE runs Windows apps by providing a library and API environment, but it doesn't run a GOS in a virtual computer.

VPC/Mac and VPC/Windows both run the GOS in a virtual computer, but only VPC/Mac does (much) ISA emulation.

ps: The "(much)" qualification is because a few privileged instructions have to be emulated on x86. The big advantage of the new VT features in Intel is that it becomes much simpler and faster to handle those oddball instructions.
 
Lollypop said:
I really thing virualization is a nice idea for servers and lab testing envorinments, but currently for the real consumer world there is little use.
Click to expand...

That's not entirely true. While I'm definitely not the average user I have a real purpose in running VMware at home. My primary box runs Linux and I have VMware installed running among other things Windows XP. This VM is setup for my work environment with my VPN, CRM and other tools to allow me to work from home. The benefit of virtualization to the home user is seperating out tasks. Before my kids had their own computers they could easily run inside a virtualized environment for their protection and mine. One of my coworkers is moving his wife and kids to their own VMs.
 
thefunkymunky said:
Has anyone else noticed this technology is codenamed Chameleon and that is going to be part of Leopard.

A chameleon can change its colour on the fly, similiar maybe to a Mac changing the OS it is running on the fly.;)

Chameleon, Leopard (Mac OS X), Windows.

Maybe a Leopard can change its spots after all.:p ;)
Click to expand...

You know, I wouldn't be surprised if that's a tagline they use if this is true.
 
If this is true, Dell and HP must be quaking in their booties. Besides for those going for the absolutely cheapest PC on the market (which Dell and HP don't make much off of anyway), or the most powerful gaming PC possible, who wouldn't seriously consider a Mac for their home?
 
Dr.Gargoyle said:
I can't wait... I am getting fed up nagging the company behind Scientific Workplace for a Mac version. Last time they told me they might have a version ready in 18 months...
Click to expand...


They may not do it at all now though, and just tell you to run the Windows version.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back