Oh NO....OSX on a dell

[Jovian9]

So if OSX is able to run on Intel and the x86 architecture.....then we will have people buying dulls and installing OSX on them. Therefore Apple will see a decrease in hardware sales d/t the fact that a lot of people who switch to Mac will no longer have to buy the hardware. We will possibly see an increase in virii(?sp?), adware, and spyware (or at least attempts) d/t this too.
So Apple might be gaining tens of millions of people spending $100+ on OSX but losing millions of people spending $500-$3000 on Mac Mini's to PowerMacs.

I like the idea that they are pursuing a reliable chip maker, but I'd still rather not have most people just using home built PC's or dulls with OSX. I'm rather attached to the idea that everyone with a Mac has a great looking, well designed machine.

Maybe I'm just missing something here.

 

[bosrs1]

So if OSX is able to run on Intel and the x86 architecture.....then we will have people buying dulls and installing OSX on them. Therefore Apple will see a decrease in hardware sales d/t the fact that a lot of people who switch to Mac will no longer have to buy the hardware. We will possibly see an increase in virii(?sp?), adware, and spyware (or at least attempts) d/t this too.
So Apple might be gaining tens of millions of people spending $100+ on OSX but losing millions of people spending $500-$3000 on Mac Mini's to PowerMacs.

I like the idea that they are pursuing a reliable chip maker, but I'd still rather not have most people just using home built PC's or dulls with OSX. I'm rather attached to the idea that everyone with a Mac has a great looking, well designed machine.

Maybe I'm just missing something here.

You're missing something... OSX still will be Mac only.

 

[Duff-Man]

Duff-Man says....PLEASE...read some of the hundred other threads and you will see that this has been talked about already in many of them. And read the press releases and info from the announcment instead of spreading more FUD....oh yeah!

 

[IJ Reilly]

You're missing something... OSX still will be Mac only.

BUT, the x86 Macs will run Windows. So much for VirtualPC!

 

[RacerX]

BUT, the x86 Macs will run Windows. So much for VirtualPC!

Where did you get that idea?

Apple is making Macs, not PC compatibles.

Just because they are going to use Intel processors doesn't mean that Apple is going to change everything to match the current PC hardware architecture.

At best, what we could get is a faster VirtualPC.

 

[AdamR01]

Where did you get that idea?

Apple is making Macs, not PC compatibles.

Just because they are going to use Intel processors doesn't mean that Apple is going to change everything to match the current PC hardware architecture.

At best, what we could get is a faster VirtualPC.

Or we could get Wine running on OS X and run Windows apps at nearly full speed and with 3d support .

 

[IJ Reilly]

Where did you get that idea?

Because Phil Schiller has said that Apple wouldn't do anything to prevent the x86 Macs from running Windows along side OSX. Given the choice of emulated or real Windows...

 

[RacerX]

Because Phil Schiller has said that Apple wouldn't do anything to prevent the x86 Macs from running Windows. Given the choice...

A special, rewritten version of Windows... but not the same Windows that runs on PC compatibles.

So that is assuming that Microsoft is going to make this version.

That is a pretty wild assumption.

 

[IJ Reilly]

I'm liking this scenario better the more I think about it. In a couple of years I might be able to dump my BDU (big dumb ugly) Windows box and just reboot my Mac into Windows whenever I want to play a game or some such.

 

[sPAULj]

The x86 Macs will use a custom bootloader different from Windows' BIOS. OS X will only run on these PCs if they have the proper architecture. Now....Someone may work on a way to get windows running on this bootloader, but it will be a third party doing it. OS X will only run on non-authorized machines if people do it illegally, which will probably be hard to do unless they emulate all windows drivers (or make their own).

In a couple of years I might be able to dump my BDU (big dumb ugly) Windows box and just reboot my Mac into Windows whenever I want to play a game or some such.

Hopefully WINE will be able to emulate well enough that Windows apps will run fine on OSX itself....including games. It definatly is possible if it's worked on hard enough.

 

[iMeowbot]

Because Phil Schiller has said that Apple wouldn't do anything to prevent the x86 Macs from running Windows along side OSX. Given the choice of emulated or real Windows...

Apple won't stand in the way if people want to do the work to make Windows run on a Mac, but they aren't offering to help make it run either. Apple won't be writing the necessary device drivers, we can pretty much count on that.

 

[IJ Reilly]

A special, rewritten version of Windows... but not the same Windows that runs on PC compatibles.

So that is assuming that Microsoft is going to make this version.

That is a pretty wild assumption.

Better get on the horn and tell Phil about that then. He never said anything about a special version. He said there wasn't any reason why you couldn't do it and Apple wouldn't do anything to prevent it.

 

[Rocksaurus]

The x86 Macs will use a custom bootloader different from Windows' BIOS. OS X will only run on these PCs if they have the proper architecture. Now....Someone may work on a way to get windows running on this bootloader, but it will be a third party doing it. OS X will only run on non-authorized machines if people do it illegally, which will probably be hard to do unless they emulate all windows drivers (or make their own).



Hopefully WINE will be able to emulate well enough that Windows apps will run fine on OSX itself....including games. It definatly is possible if it's worked on hard enough.

So could you extract this bootloader and put it on say... an AMD?

 

[IJ Reilly]

Apple won't stand in the way if people want to do the work to make Windows run on a Mac, but they aren't offering to help make it run either. Apple won't be writing the necessary device drivers, we can pretty much count on that.

I'd think the main issue would be sound subsystem drivers for Windows and a method for identifying and selecting the Windows boot volume. Not even sure you'd need to emulate the PC boot ROMs, but it's not like they're very complex. None of this is brain surgery I shouldn't think.

 

[RacerX]

Better get on the horn and tell Phil about that then. He never said anything about a special version. He said there wasn't any reason why you couldn't do it and Apple wouldn't do anything to prevent it.

He said that Apple wouldn't do anything to prevent it. You're reading in the rest.

 

[IJ Reilly]

He said that Apple wouldn't do anything to prevent it. You're reading in the rest.

He said more than that. He also said that people probably will run Windows on them, which means Apple knows it can be done.

 

[iMeowbot]

I'd think the main issue would be sound subsystem drivers for Windows and a method for identifying and selecting the Windows boot volume. Not even sure you'd need to emulate the PC boot ROMs, but it's not like they're very complex. None of this is brain surgery I shouldn't think.

I don't know which of these 600 threads I mentioned this in (this place is hopping!), but the current state of Linux on Macs should give a good indication of what this will be like. Hardware support lags behind, because Apple change things from model to model. Airport Extreme still doesn't work there, power management, fan control, modems, sound are all hit or miss even on models that have been around for a while, and goes on and on. And that's with the ability to modify the base OS!

A hosted Windows is a much saner way to go.

 

[RacerX]

He said more than that. He also said that people probably will run Windows on them, which means Apple knows it can be done.

Solve this for us then... put in the exact quote.

Don't paraphrase it... the exact quote please.

 

[x86isslow]

Or we could get Wine running on OS X and run Windows apps at nearly full speed and with 3d support .

well i think we'll still have our miserable 5200-class video cards

would we get windows-like 3dfx without DX9 support?

 

[dejo]

Solve this for us then... put in the exact quote.

Don't paraphrase it... the exact quote please.

Here's the quote I found on CNET:

After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."

However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.

 

[RacerX]

Here's the quote I found on CNET:

Thanks.

I guess we'll see.

I was just talking with a friend who is no longer restricted by his NDA who has been working with this (the developer) hardware. He didn't think that plain Windows could be installed and run on it. The hardware is too different.

 

[DakotaGuy]

Better get on the horn and tell Phil about that then.

LMFAO!!!

 

[DakotaGuy]

The hardware is too different.

What is different about it? An Intel x86 PC is a Intel x86 PC whether it has a fancy Apple logo on it or not.

 

[iMeowbot]

What is different about it? An Intel x86 PC is a Intel x86 PC whether it has a fancy Apple logo on it or not.

Why won't SunOS boot on a Mac Color Classic? It has the same 68030 as a Sun/3.

 

[RacerX]

What is different about it? An Intel x86 PC is a Intel x86 PC whether it has a fancy Apple logo on it or not.

Well, then a PowerPC 604e system is a PowerPC 604e system whether it has a fancy Apple logo on it or not... Right?

Ever try to install AIX on a PowerMacintosh 9600? Or any Mac OS on an IBM workstation... or even an Apple Workgroup Server 500/700 (they only run AIX even though they are carrying a fancy Apple logo and run on the same processors found in the Power Macintoshes of that time)

And a 68040 system is a 68040 system whether it has a fancy Apple logo on it or not... Right?

Ever try to install NEXTSTEP on a Quadra 950? Or System 7 on a NeXTstation?

There is a lot that is needed to make hardware compatible with these operating systems. The fact that IBM didn't lock down what was needed to make PC compatibles is why all these other companies can make them today.


Like I said, we'll see. I don't know anyone who would have an opportunity to try this currently, but I'm sure once the developer hardware starts showing up we'll start hearing reports one way or another.