Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Leopard's Secret Features: Windows as the new Classic
- Thread starter sigamy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Lawsuits? Over what??
I'm not confusing anything with anything. (Not at the moment, anyway.)
We've been hearing that old canard about scaring away Mac developers for years now. It started with SoftWindows, then VPC, then Parallels, then Boot Camp. And do you know what? I hasn't actually happened.
Apple can't go head-to-head with Microsoft and the rest of the PC industry, but they can pull some slick end-runs. Boot Camp is only the most recent of these end-runs. If Apple is comfortable allowing Mac owners to boot Windows, then why in the world would they be uninterested in allowing Mac owners to run Windows software without buying a copy of Windows?
Just stop for a moment and consider the public and industry reaction if Apple announced that Leopard included WINE-like capabilities. Think Boot Camp with an exponent after it. Think Bill Gates with a massive coronary.
Infringing on sales of Windows. If Apple offers a WINE-like solution, then you wouldn't need a copy of Windows to run Windows apps on a Mac. And if that happens, you can bet that Micro$oft is gonna send their lawyers, and try to sue Apple big time.
Ha-ha. So now nobody is allowed to even compete with Microsoft?
There's no such concept as "infringing on sales." If Microsoft can't destroy WINE, then they can't legally prevent Apple from doing the same thing in OSX. I've thought about this for a long time, and I can't come up with a single good reason why Apple would not try this gambit, unless there are major technical hurdles, of which I am unaware.
Not so fast my friend. Surely you remember the famous alliance Apple made w/ Microsoft back in 1997? You know, the one that let Microsoft have access to all of the stuff that Apple was using and the rights to "borrow" a number of ideas. It was a five year deal that expired in 2002. Windows XP was released in October 2001. What does all this mean? The same agreement that gave Microsoft access to inside Apple info also worked in the other direction. Apple has full access rights to the API's for Windows XP.
As I am sure you are also aware, Apple has been running Mac OS X on Intel hardware for many years in the lab. Steve said so himself. Well, apparently Apple has also been running Windows applications on Mac OS X on Intel hardware for many years. I say there is a very good chance this is one of the secret features of Leopard.
For more information, check out this article.
If you read Cringely's article again, you'll see the "may" and "some" qualifications with respect to Windows APIs. I personally suspect that any right Apple gained to Windows APIs was quite limited, as the dispute which was settled in the 1997 cross-licensing agreement was over multimedia code, and I've never heard anyone claim that both companies exchanged all of their company treasures, and can't think of a reason why they would. The other problem with his theory is the XP limitation. Even if they had rights to them, it seems doubtful that Apple would want to implement XP's APIs in OSX just when the Windows world is moving on to Vista. That makes Windows software compatibility just as much of a moving target as if Apple implemented their own version of WINE.
I don't know that there are actually any 'Windows apps' at all. I imagine that you would still be paying the actual software developer for their product, be it Photoshop, Halo, whatever. Infringing on sales implies that you are selling a copy, not a competitive product. I mean, Pepsi 'infringes' on Coke sales all the time.
I'm with IJ, I'd like to see this become reality.
Well, or course. I was referring to the sale of the OS, not any software applications that would be run under Windows.
Don't get me wrong, I think it would be an awesome feature, I honestly cannot stand the Windows enviorment, but for some reason, I don't see Leopard with this feature.
Fundamentally though, the OS only exists to run the software programs developed by other companies, or by the OS manufacturer itself. If we could run programs compatible with Windows by using a WINE-like process in OS X, there is no chance of copyright infringement or other illegal business practice.
It's called competition. If MS doesn't want OS X to 'steal' customers away, they're more than welcome to improve their product.
Don't forget all the crud that most programs leave behind, such as caches, preferance files, etc.
If Apple bought or worked with CodeWeavers (creators of crossover), who already have a solid base, they could do with WINE what they did to dual-booting with BootCamp after the onmac.net success...
Surely this would make mac vulnerable to viruses. I really don't think Macs will ever run windows programs. Surely that is just saying 'buy a PC', and surely it is saying to software developers 'only spend your money on making windows apps 'cos they also run in mac os x' defying the whole point of buying a mac for reliability, stability and a virus-free environment. If this is true, it will be the end of Apple; I don't think it is true for one second.