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.
Mac OS SE?
- Thread starter void
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
hmm. windows application compatibility would be pretty cool. It would end all those "there aren't any programs for mac" claims from windoze users
Lame, exactly why would Apple break tradition and give their next OS a name like SE instead of continuing with the number system. X wasn't just something they thought sounded cool,it stands for 10 ya' know.
Not so fast
There's a good argument against building complete Windows "compatibility" into a separate OS. If your emulation is good enough, then why should anyone spend the serious $$$ to build apps for your "real" OS? I don't know about you, but I sure don't want to run the Windows version of Photoshop or Freehand on my Mac because they're "the same program." They're not.
There's a good argument against building complete Windows "compatibility" into a separate OS. If your emulation is good enough, then why should anyone spend the serious $$$ to build apps for your "real" OS? I don't know about you, but I sure don't want to run the Windows version of Photoshop or Freehand on my Mac because they're "the same program." They're not.
if apple pursued it they could easily incorporate windows functionality..
have you guys heard of wine..? [check out http://www.winehq.com/] it aint perfect but im sure that if a company really spent a few years developing it, it could be awesome.. course theyd have to run this version on x86 processors..
but i dont see that being in apples future..
have you guys heard of wine..? [check out http://www.winehq.com/] it aint perfect but im sure that if a company really spent a few years developing it, it could be awesome.. course theyd have to run this version on x86 processors..
but i dont see that being in apples future..
If Apple really wanted to have Windows applications ported to Mac OS X, they should work on a method to convert the source code which could then be compiled as a native application on Mac OS X. This would eliminate any compatibility issues and emulation.
However, IBM did this with S.M.A.R.T. for OS/2 years ago and apparently, not many companies took advantage of the opportunity.
However, IBM did this with S.M.A.R.T. for OS/2 years ago and apparently, not many companies took advantage of the opportunity.
Naw, let's have Mac OS XI, then Mac OS XII, etc. In a few years, we'll all be discussing the upgrade from Mac OS CCXCVIII to Mac OS CCXCIX!
Isn't there a linux program for windows compatibility now. I don't know its capabilities, but I'm pretty sure it exists, just like the mac-on-linux stuff out there. How legal are those things. I can't imagine MS letting them go if they weren't. I think Lindows uses a windows compatability program, but I could be wrong.
Apple actually did work on a windows compatability layer in the early generations of Os X. At least, thats what I seem to remember (from back in the days when things were known as yellow box, etc)
Um... or everyone could stop dreaming... 
Well is is POSSIBLE but very very unlikely. the best we will ever see is.
VPC...the next best thing...
Well it is!
Well is is POSSIBLE but very very unlikely. the best we will ever see is.
VPC...the next best thing...
Well it is!
I don't know about the rest of you, but I bought a Mac to run Mac programs. If I wanted to run Windows programs, I would have gotten a PC. I know several Windows user who wish they had a progam like VPC to run Mac OS X on their PC's, and I always tell them that they should have purchased a Mac. Personally, I would never own a program like VPC. It just gives more money to Microsoft, and it's a smack in Apple's face. It's like people are saying to Apple, "Your OS is great and all, but I still depend on Windows to do my important stuff." If you're a Mac user, then use Mac OS and be happy we have such a great system. If you want to run Windows on a Mac, I really don't consider you a true Mac user.
For those who are curious.
Virtual PC is a x86 platform emulator. It will run x86 flavors of linux distros, win95->XP.
In Linux, to run Windows stuff, you can either run an emulator called VMWare (which is like Virtual PC).
A completely different (and open source) implementation of the win32 API for the linux platform is the WINE project. WINE: IS NOT an EMULATOR. Transgaming is using a modded version of Wine to make directx 8 gams work (notables are Max Payne, Half Life/Counter Strike, etc.)
My thinking is that the world of UNIX can do without Win32 platform stuff. What do you need from the windows world?? You got the Adobe stuff, you got the M$ Office, you got Gimp, you got Abiword, you got Fink.... you even have MacMAME. The only thing I can think of that PC has that OS X doesn't much of are games. Jaguar has excellent support for OpenGL... Shrug... what can I say? It's just cuz Windows is more popular with the game developers (and the large install base) that OS X suffers in this area.
End of Rant.
Virtual PC is a x86 platform emulator. It will run x86 flavors of linux distros, win95->XP.
In Linux, to run Windows stuff, you can either run an emulator called VMWare (which is like Virtual PC).
A completely different (and open source) implementation of the win32 API for the linux platform is the WINE project. WINE: IS NOT an EMULATOR. Transgaming is using a modded version of Wine to make directx 8 gams work (notables are Max Payne, Half Life/Counter Strike, etc.)
My thinking is that the world of UNIX can do without Win32 platform stuff. What do you need from the windows world?? You got the Adobe stuff, you got the M$ Office, you got Gimp, you got Abiword, you got Fink.... you even have MacMAME. The only thing I can think of that PC has that OS X doesn't much of are games. Jaguar has excellent support for OpenGL... Shrug... what can I say? It's just cuz Windows is more popular with the game developers (and the large install base) that OS X suffers in this area.
End of Rant.
As long as you have the attitude that "it's a Windows world", it will continue to be a Windows world. By not supporting programs like VPC, we say to Microsoft that this isn't a complete Windows world.
True but......
There are some things that I want to work on using my Mac but are Windows specific (.net is my biggest issue and visual studio). I'd like to write, compile and run all the code on my TiBook. It's a pain when consulting to have to switch platforms all the time. What makes it worse I prefer doing some things on my Mac (art work) so I'd need two separate machines.
VPC doesn't cut it, at least not the moment. Still my fingers are crossed to see the platform ported.
A compatability layer is good a idea for the consumer but not for Apple or Microsoft and for that reason I don't think it will happen anytime soon. At the end of the day Apple is a company and profits override everything else.
Lindows does have windows compatibility, it can run most but not all windows programs. MS was not happy about the lindows name and the windows compatibility and tried to sue. However the judge said that they couldn't sue over the name because terms " windows " and "windowed operating system", do not belong to MS and are considered "industry terms". And about the part on windows compatibility, i believe that lindows had to drop it from their ad compaign, but did keep the functionality.
...And any decent apps for architects that can deal with industry standard .dwg (AutoCad) files.
If I take any real work home with me, I have to use VPC - no choice.
That does not mean I think they should build a Windows compatibility layer into OS X. I think they should provide a platform viable enough that developers of these apps want to port them to the mac because they know people will buy the product.
Instead, what happened in the architecture biz, was that developers pulled the plug on their mac ports in the late '90s, basically forcing offices to switch to PCs (a huge number of London offices were mac-based), or lose the investment they had made in their CAD licences (£4k+ each). Hence we all work on cheap PCs now. Old beige G3 workstations are now used as e-mail servers or are gathering dust in the basement.
So I hope OS X does become the Unix flavour and starts picking up all the anti-M$ business - compelling those same developers to port their products to it... even if it means using the bloody X11 windowing system (I don't care that much if it works - it would be a start in the right direction).
Not sure what other professions have been left by the wayside quite like this.
Actually, this was know as Open32. S.M.A.R.T. is a technology that warns the user of impending hard drive failure.
Open32 wasn't successful (unless you look at some of the programs made to run due to the Odin Project) for the reason stated earlier. If OS/2 could run Windows apps then why should anyone bother to write OS/2 apps? IBM's marketing strategy of OS/2 being "a better Windows than Windows. A better DOS than DOS" is one of the things that helped kill that operating system. A shame, too. I was, and still am, a fan of OS/2.
why bother, you could just go pick up a whole lindows pc for 200 bucks at walmart. Seriously. check it out...
http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp?product_id=1957333&cat=3944&type=19&dept=3944&path=0%3A3944
not the best quality computer but hey, a new coputer for 200 bucks, even dell can't touch that...
Yeah, it's pretty funny when you can buy a whole computer for the price of the full version of XP Home.
As for Lindows itself, I might be trying it out in a few days. I'll keep the rest of you posted.
As for Lindows itself, I might be trying it out in a few days. I'll keep the rest of you posted.