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

VMWare On Mac OSX Coming?

jayducharme said:
BTW, has anyone heard of MS viruses corrupting the new Intel Macs if Windows is booted into? It would be a real problem if a virus prevented re-booting the machine. I've heard that virtualization software contains any viruses to the data file (which can easily be deleted), so any threat is greatly reduced.
Click to expand...

With virtualization everything is contained in one large image. A virus comes in the virtualized environment, it'll stay there (unless you open a socket to yr base system which would make it vulnerable / prone for infection).
 
witness said:
If you are using OS X with a US keyboard layout, only want to use Parallels for Windows XP and are not planning on connecting external devices to the virtual machine, then Parallels (release version) is pretty reliable.
Click to expand...

I have had no problems whatsoever. Been running SUSE, RH4, Solaris10, DOS and XP, NT4, 98.
 
So when is parallels going to increase support for USB devices? I tried using a USB memory stick and a writing tablet on it with no luck whatsoever. Apparently webcams of any kind don't work either.
 
VMware

I've been using VMware on windows, and I can say it's a great piece of software.

I guess it will run much better on Mac OS X.
VMware for windows supports lots of USB and Firewire peripherals. It supports my external hard drive, external flash drive, my digital camera and my printer.

The only thing it doesn't support is my webcam.
 
Sounds like a fanboi wish...

ro2nie said:
I've been using VMware on windows, and I can say it's a great piece of software.

I guess it will run much better on Mac OS X.
Click to expand...
Why do you guess that?

VMware on Linux and VMware on Windows seem to be almost identical as far as I can tell - why would it be "better" on OSX than on the other two platforms?
 
have you tried?

gkhaldi said:
If only my Macbook could accomodate 4GB of RAM (or more)😀 😀
Click to expand...
It should, the other Yonah laptops accept 2 GiB SO-DIMMs for a max of 4 GiB of RAM. The chipset doesn't support more than 4 GiB, however, so you won't get anything higher.

I have 4 GiB in my Dell Latitude 2.16 Core Duo...
 
It seems to me financially risky for any developer to make inroads into an area where Apple has intentions. Look at what happened to Watson and Konfabulator.
 
gkhaldi said:
Too little , too late for VMWare. Their arrogant behavior will haunt them. A couple of large manufacturers have already abandoned more or less VMWare. Most of them opt for Xen (Open Source) or HW virtualisation (now that's the way to go).

For me, I got Parallels (official release) running on my Macbook Pro. I build images with Suse, RH, Solaris, MS-DOS (yep, still use a very old accounting program for consulting previous fiscal years) and Windows.

I haven't had a single crash, freeze (exept when shutting down SUSE) or malfunction. If only my Macbook could accomodate 4GB of RAM (or more)😀 😀
Click to expand...


Umm dude. VMWare Workstation is the BEST virt software on the market hands down.
 
swingerofbirch said:
It seems to me financially risky for any developer to make inroads into an area where Apple has intentions. Look at what happened to Watson and Konfabulator.
Click to expand...


There is a difference between dual booting an OS and virt an OS. As far as anyone know Apple is only focusing on dual booting with Windows. If it stays that way there is no reason that VMWare workstation couldn't be a powerful addition to the Mac. God know there are times when I would rather virt an app in OS X instead of rebooting into Windows. Then there would be times I would like to simply boot into Windows to run Civ IV, Black and White 2, Pirates!, etc.
 
Buying VPC also allowed microsoft to build the emulator to allow Xbox 360 to run XBox 1 - which is PPC 970... This functionality would be / *is* far more profitable than for purely selling VPC to Apple users.

Windows NT used to run on multiple architectures, but slowly, microsoft axed them. The Alpha was the last to go.

Windows is far from dead.


Boony said:
This is very good, but why ?

Once in a time, some years ago, I did some beta-testing for Connectix Virtual PC. It was born on a Mac platform and did some cool stuff like learning another Processor-architecture. Yes, bringing the same product out on an Intel-Based Platform. So the people behind connectix had the same capabilities what Apple Corp. can do with it's operating system. Boxing the mac-os out on different Microprocessor Architectures. What I see, there's no company more that can port an Operating System over on a different Microprocessor Architecture anymore. Just Apple. OK, Parallels make's the product available for another OS, but the same Intel Architecture. The same with VMWare, now they're porting cause OS X runs on an Intel Architecture.

In fact, it's poor manufacturing. I thought Microsoft did it once, porting Windows (server) over on another Processor Architecture. But they've dropped the product. And, what are the goals (a time ago) by buying over Connectix ? To get some foot in the door of Apple, or promote M$ Virtual Machine instead of porting Word over to OS X native (on PPC), you can buy a Windows License ? To Shake Apple Corp. with the words: And what if you users get no Word anymore ?

But see the facts, M$ is loosing grip on everything they've porting to another processor architecture and OS. Like a BIG Elephant that moves slowly, little mice makes better products. In fact Apple Corp. is at the moment a BIG winner, as a little mice in the BIG and slowly M$, IBM blues and Sun micro systems industry. (I think you will remember Project Looking Glass - And look at Apple's OS X Dashboard, Frontrow ....)

In the last run, the better OS (like OS X) will virtualize the simple standards like Windosez etc .... I think VM Ware knows that, and step by step it's doing its plans: Server virtualizations on (L)unix user friendly systems like MAC OS X.

Microsoft Windows is dead, it's an OLD architecture ... It's a wheel re-invented with wistle and bells ... But it rolls anymore

Peter
Click to expand...
 
swingerofbirch said:
It seems to me financially risky for any developer to make inroads into an area where Apple has intentions. Look at what happened to Watson and Konfabulator.
Click to expand...

VMWare are established , well respected and offer multiple platform VMs... Apple won't worry them - particularly for companies. Companies will choose VMware because of prior experience and reputation.

Any Apple offering will not meet the needs - it will be basic functionality, compared to that of VMWare products.
 
OSX on Windows' VMWare

Could VMWare offer this, the other way around legally?
I mean, can you legally run virtualized OSX on a Windows box over VMWare?

Because this would be something a little different and it seems VMWare is the company that would be more interested in doing it ...
(I know you can hack OSX into a PC, but not legally ...)

Not that I need to, but if there is some OS X only sw that IT groups may want to run, maybe this would be a possible path to migration or a risk to Apple's Hw ...
 
javierbds said:
Could VMWare offer this, the other way around legally?

I mean, can you legally run virtualized OSX on a Windows box over VMWare?
Click to expand...
That's up to Apple. Current licensing terms for OSX would not allow this, even if the DRM were not an issue.
 
WINE, not VMWare or even Parallels. I don't want windows, I just want to run the apps.

Serious question, why use windows when you don't have to?
 
compatibility...

Some_Big_Spoon said:
WINE, not VMWare or even Parallels. I don't want windows, I just want to run the apps.

Serious question, why use windows when you don't have to?
Click to expand...
If WINE truly worked, then it would be a serious question.

Too many apps don't work right with WINE, though.
 
Some_Big_Spoon said:
WINE, not VMWare or even Parallels. I don't want windows, I just want to run the apps.

Serious question, why use windows when you don't have to?
Click to expand...

Because mono is not going to be usable under osX for a long time...
 
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