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.
Over 1000 Universal (Intel) Applications? and Windows on Mac?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, the thing is its not like Windows automatically comes with viruses, you actually have to do something. I think as long as people go on internet and download stuff with their Macs there will not be an issue of viruses because they won't come into contact with your XP. Simple. Everything works better on Mac, except for what doesn't work so why would you contract a virus under Windows. The only exception would be games.TaKashMoney said:
Lord Blackadder said:Emulation really won't be an option since I'll be running CAD-like software that is fairly hardware intensive. I actually have a craptastic homebuilt PC that will probably do the job but in the near future I will need a laptop, and I'd prefer to be able to have my cake and eat it too.
I think your impression of emulation suffers a lot from what you've seen of existing emulation solutions. In this case, there is not nearly as much stuff to "emulate." The existing architecture is there -- it's just a case of using it appropriately. This is what VMWare has done for the Windows and Linux worlds, and the speed penalty is minor.
Intel VT-X techology
When the PowerMacs come out with the Sassoman or whatever that have the Intel Virtualization technology builtin to it, this will create a huge demand for apple hardware. The intel virtualization technology allows two independant operating systems to run virtually under one cpu. This will surely solve the problem of people who "need" to run some of those business apps in a windows environment yet giving OSX too.
dberg
When the PowerMacs come out with the Sassoman or whatever that have the Intel Virtualization technology builtin to it, this will create a huge demand for apple hardware. The intel virtualization technology allows two independant operating systems to run virtually under one cpu. This will surely solve the problem of people who "need" to run some of those business apps in a windows environment yet giving OSX too.
dberg
Don't forget Virtual PC
Microsoft has the apparent advantage here. They can do a VMM (Virtual Machine Manager) on OS X (VPC/Mac), and they can Windows and Linux guest machines. They need to port the PPC VMM from OSxPPC to OSx86, and remove the instruction set emulator needed on PPC and insert the VM layer from the Virtual PC (Windows) product.
VMware has to write an OSx86 VMM, and create the OSX GUI and other management interfaces.
Don't forget Virtual PC for Windows and Virtual Server - they also do the Windows (or Linux) VMs running on Windows, with a similar (usually minor) performance hit.john123 said:
Microsoft has the apparent advantage here. They can do a VMM (Virtual Machine Manager) on OS X (VPC/Mac), and they can Windows and Linux guest machines. They need to port the PPC VMM from OSxPPC to OSx86, and remove the instruction set emulator needed on PPC and insert the VM layer from the Virtual PC (Windows) product.
VMware has to write an OSx86 VMM, and create the OSX GUI and other management interfaces.
Look behind you...
It doesn't do you any good without a VT-aware VMM to actually run the virtual machines.
Yonah already has Intel's VT inside. (http://www.intel.com/ca/pressroom/2006/0105.htm)dberg said:
It doesn't do you any good without a VT-aware VMM to actually run the virtual machines.
It's great to see so many applications making the transition so quickly. The number one app on my list is of course is the CS3 suite. End of the year release date... that's not too bad at all. I can wait that long.
End of the year release date... that's not too bad at all. I can wait that long.
Not sure what that has to do with Adobe or name-calling, but I agree--I often repeated the key "BY" in Steve's phraseAidenShaw said:But then, The Steve said that some MacIntels would be out "by WWDC'06" - and when they appeared in January the headlines read "Intel six months early" and the fanbois swooned.
OTOH, since WWDC'06 will be in August, I guess it was 8 months early....
And I always expected the first Intel Macs at MWSF06.
I don't know what sort of applications people use for productivity but applications like Create from Stone Design are most certainly significant and powerful.
http://www.stone.com/Create_Screenshot.html
You said "Re Adobe: they never said 2007. Their estimates ALWAYS made 2006 a possibility, and 2007 a worst case." right after a comment that Adobe had advanced the date.nagromme said:
AidenShaw said:
Well, according to thinksecret...we could have it by the end of the year. I just hope they don't rush it!
Maybe I'm Just Paranoid
This speaks to my relative apprehension--with Windows on Apple hardware, will the future Macintosh OS development suffer? As much as I love the iPod, and the Macintosh, when it comes down to it, the one thing I don't think I could live without is OS X. I just hope Apple keeps up its development as they have to this point!
Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you.
muffinman said:
This speaks to my relative apprehension--with Windows on Apple hardware, will the future Macintosh OS development suffer? As much as I love the iPod, and the Macintosh, when it comes down to it, the one thing I don't think I could live without is OS X. I just hope Apple keeps up its development as they have to this point!
Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you.
This dual-booting would indeed allow me to get rid of my PC, but I don't know how I feel about having both OSes on my Mac.
In general, whether it be Windows or another OS, to me it seems like having two OSes on my machine would bog it down a bit and would take up a lot of extra space. I like things lean, mean and minimal when it comes to my Mac.
Also, there's the whole security issue as other posters have pointed out as well. I would have to load AV software, AdAware, etc. on the Windows piece, and how would that affect things? What if a I catch a virus while running Windows which does something OS-agnostic to my computer, like erase my HDD or something? Then it won't matter if OS X is secure or invulnerable, if my Windows partition is to blame.
And wouldn't you need BIOS and EFI coexisting in some way?
I guess I just question the overall efficiency of the setup.
Perhaps another way to go after the Windows crowd is to allow them to legitimately install OS X on their PCs. Hmm, with a Leopard preview at WWDC this year, wouldn't it be cool if Leopard could run on PCs natively, as well as Macs? Just as Vista is released (i.e. Tiger), Apple launches Leopard, blowing Vista out of the water - and it's available for PC too.
In general, whether it be Windows or another OS, to me it seems like having two OSes on my machine would bog it down a bit and would take up a lot of extra space. I like things lean, mean and minimal when it comes to my Mac.
Also, there's the whole security issue as other posters have pointed out as well. I would have to load AV software, AdAware, etc. on the Windows piece, and how would that affect things? What if a I catch a virus while running Windows which does something OS-agnostic to my computer, like erase my HDD or something? Then it won't matter if OS X is secure or invulnerable, if my Windows partition is to blame.
And wouldn't you need BIOS and EFI coexisting in some way?
I guess I just question the overall efficiency of the setup.
Perhaps another way to go after the Windows crowd is to allow them to legitimately install OS X on their PCs. Hmm, with a Leopard preview at WWDC this year, wouldn't it be cool if Leopard could run on PCs natively, as well as Macs? Just as Vista is released (i.e. Tiger
), Apple launches Leopard, blowing Vista out of the water - and it's available for PC too. 
I thought I heard that Microsoft recently pledged to continue making Office mac for the next 5 years. Could this be a new deal Apple made with them so Microsoft will not release a Mac compatible OS until the 5 years are up? I think any Windows that runs on the Mac in the next few years will be an unsupported hack and nothing legit.
Wouldn't that be just like Mr. Jobs?
I agree that such an event would be remarkable, and very welcome, but I return to something that Mr. Wozniak said a few months ago about Apple being primarily a hardware company. I guess I tend to agree with him, that for all the elegant and seamless software Apple produces, it really is a means to sell more hardware. Am I wrong?
~Shard~ said:...Perhaps another way to go after the Windows crowd is to allow them to legitimately install OS X on their PCs. Hmm, with a Leopard preview at WWDC this year, wouldn't it be cool if Leopard could run on PCs natively, as well as Macs? Just as Vista is released (i.e. Tiger
I agree that such an event would be remarkable, and very welcome, but I return to something that Mr. Wozniak said a few months ago about Apple being primarily a hardware company. I guess I tend to agree with him, that for all the elegant and seamless software Apple produces, it really is a means to sell more hardware. Am I wrong?
evilgEEk said:
VirtualPC would also be more useful. I don't know anyone with dual-boot computer who restarts his computer for a single task, then boot back into the other OS... It's counter-productive!
Want Windows on your Mac? Get VirtualPC, forget this dual-boot thing...
boncellis said:
I don't think you're wrong, but I still wouldn't downplay the "elegance and seamlessness" of OS X, as you put it. I think many Windows users would rather use OS X if they only knew how cool and powerful it is - something like my suggestion would encourage this opportunity. I think there are many people out there who could care less if they were running on PC hardware or Mac hardware as long as they could use OS X. Not everyone of course, but some people.
And now that Macs are looking more like PCs on the inside anyway with the Intel transition this is becoming less of an issue in many respects... 
jacinto45 said:
Why can't RealPlayer die and do what Microsoft did with WMP for OS X (e.i., flip4mac)? I don't like Microsoft, but I hate Real.
treblah said:
It doesn't work. The DVD doesn't appear in the Startup Disk pane, and you can't boot from it.
Couple of things: If you are woried about virus's and spyware, this is where Virtual PC, Q, QEMU, VMware all have an advantage because Windows runs in a "sand box". WINE on the other hand is closer to your actual hardware and doesn't have a drive image, per se.
As I write this, I'm on my new Macbook Pro (yeah, baby!). Its a great machine. In anticipation of the machine being delivered, I downloaded a copy of "Q" from http://www.kberg.ch/q/ ... at the bottom of the page, on the right side, you can get the latest "unstable" build. When I first installed and then loaded windows on my G4, it was SLOW. However, I knew that was the case and I created and loaded up a fresh install of Windows 2000 Pro and Windows XP Pro. Once my Macbook Pro arrived, I copied the drive images over and launched. WOW. What a difference! Both drive images were much more responsive than the Virtual PC 7 images i was using on the G4. The save and restore only takes seconds. When they finish this, add the virtualization engine, and clean the interface, this will absolutely smoke Virtual PC ... and its FREE. Go open source!!!
As I write this, I'm on my new Macbook Pro (yeah, baby!). Its a great machine. In anticipation of the machine being delivered, I downloaded a copy of "Q" from http://www.kberg.ch/q/ ... at the bottom of the page, on the right side, you can get the latest "unstable" build. When I first installed and then loaded windows on my G4, it was SLOW. However, I knew that was the case and I created and loaded up a fresh install of Windows 2000 Pro and Windows XP Pro. Once my Macbook Pro arrived, I copied the drive images over and launched. WOW. What a difference! Both drive images were much more responsive than the Virtual PC 7 images i was using on the G4. The save and restore only takes seconds. When they finish this, add the virtualization engine, and clean the interface, this will absolutely smoke Virtual PC ... and its FREE. Go open source!!!
I really would like Microsoft to just release software like Rosetta that would let a user load applications within OS X. Or hell even lisence Direct X to Apple.