Windows Applications On Mac, Without Windows

[ChrisA]

I'm surprised more companies haven't tried to develop this sooner.

It was hard to be "sooner". The free version of this came out weeks after the first Intel Mac. What we see here in Alpha release of a commercial version. As for way there are not more companies. This is Open Source software Once someone puts the source code on the Internet there is no incentive for anyone else to duplicate that work when it available for free. Easier to build off that than re-invent.

 

[asphalt-proof]

I hereby contend that the current state of the Mac and Windows platforms is very, VERY different from the state of the OS/2 and Windows platforms at that time.

There is really no comparing the two situations. Doing so sounds good at first glance but this situation is not that one. The similarities one might note are all affected by the pile of differences.

Some examples: Mac OS X has an established consumer user base with significant public mindshare, developer support, and history. (You think too few people know about the Mac... go out on the street and ask random passersby if they ever heard of OS/2 It is also, across the board, fully mature, complete for a huge range of tasks, and in fact often a more productive environment than Windows. And it's tied to some great hardware. And it's not marketed in the way OS/2 was, nor to the same people. And Windows is currently in a situation to be vulnerable to defectors, more than the reverse. And Mac OS has highly polished end-to-end experience that Windows apps break. And Mac OS has a passionate user base that WILL resist non-native apps. (Look at the heated objections people had to running even Classic Mac apps instead of carbon ports!) And the Mac has a huge library of top-shelf, heavily-relied-upon, big-name, profitable native apps already long established.

The list could go on, but bottom line: OS/2 tells us very little about the future of Mac OS. OS/2 was vulnerable in ways that just don't make sense with the Mac platform.

(O/T but I'm reminded of people saying that Apple will lose the marketshare lead with iPod because they lost the marketshare lead with the Mac... when they never HAD a lead with the Mac )

Thank you. Thank you. Thank YOU!!! I hope that people will read your post and gain a little perspective. The OS2 situation is a vastly different animal than what we are dealing with right now. This is only a good thing for Apple.

 

[GFLPraxis]

Question: Which would run faster the PPC version of Photoshop running under Rosetta or the Windows versin of PS running under Wine? My gueess is The Winddows version would run twice as fast. Same for Office.

Windows version under WINE. It'd be running at full speed, minus some overhead from the extra RAM of having OS X and part of Windows running at the same time. PPC Photoshop would be running under emulation. Much slower.

 

[FF_productions]

So while I'm out of town I hear about this crazy story telling me I can run my windows apps NATIVELY on OSX.

I hope it comes standard with Leopard so someone doesn't have to whip out 60 dollars to do this.

 

[madtowndoc]

Sweet! My 10th grade invention (11 years ago) of the PowerMacWinDOS (a play on Power Macintosh), a computer that runs Mac, Windows, and DOS programs all in one Mac operating system, will finally see the light of day! If only I had developed it first!

 

[Mammoth]

Yes... I hope these 'educational' discounts extend to K-12 students.

 

[iAlan]

Honestly, not sure what to make of this...

Let's say it works well. Let's also say that a majority of key software offerings are compatable. Would these companies then continue to invest in developing OS X versions of their software? Honestly. If a company could develop just one version of their software for 2 (or more) platforms then why evelop 2?

And did Apple concider teh posibilioty of this happening? Although given Apple's current software development (and acquisition) they may have Apple-created equivalents for all the software that runs Windows versions on OS x anyway (can you see the headline 'Apple acquires Adobe' on all major news wires in the next 18 months?)

 

[ezekielrage_99]

Sign me up, I'm buying this one

This is better than buying a copy of Windows XP SP2

 

[pmitch]

The only programs that are a must for me are CS2, Dreamweaver, Flash and the bevy of Windows browsers.

MS Publisher is one that comes to mind. I know two teachers weaned on Windows who find to hard to accept Macs because that one program doesn't run on them. But I don't see MS Publisher on the supported list

 

[macthorough]

BigDEal

10.5 is going to be able to run windows natively, meaning windows will run like OS9 Classic does currently. Thsi means no more rebooting to change ur startup disk. (bootcamop builtin basically)!!!

= )

 

[BornAgainMac]

I wish it would focus on programs that are not available on the Mac. I would rather pay $500 for a Mac version than run some crappy Windows version of the same app for free.

Also OS/2 wasn't that much different than Windows for 90% of the people out there. At least you can see the differences with OSX with boot times, visual eye candy, speed, and unique software.

 

[2ndPath]

Question: Which would run faster the PPC version of Photoshop running under Rosetta or the Windows versin of PS running under Wine? My gueess is The Winddows version would run twice as fast. Same for Office.

Wheres und Cross Over Office the newest Photoshop version working seems to be 7 (at least on linux) while the OSX native version is available in newer versions like CS and CS2.

 

[mark!]

10.5 is going to be able to run windows natively, meaning windows will run like OS9 Classic does currently. Thsi means no more rebooting to change ur startup disk. (bootcamop builtin basically)!!!

= )

just a rumor

 

[retroneo]

yes, but he's trying to make a point. whether you buy the mac or windows version is up to you.

But for switchers, they wouldn't need to re-purchase their entire software library.

 

[retroneo]

If an application is written for a PC it follows all the PC strictures. We would have the menu bar on each window and a square/line and X in the place of the colored buttons. All the menus would all be set up like on a PC. There would be no application consitency and we may as well be running Windows.

It is possible to integrate this better and give Windows applications a Mac OS-like look and feel. Just look at the (optional) Mac OS look and feel of the Java environment for an idea of how this looks. The windows menubar at the top of a window can be easily re-implemented to be more mac like at the top of the screen.

Future versions won't require X-windows.

 

[shawnce]

It is possible to integrate this better and give Windows applications a Mac OS-like look and feel. Just look at the (optional) Mac OS look and feel of the Java environment for an idea of how this looks. The windows menubar at the top of a window can be easily re-implemented to be more mac like at the top of the screen.

The Aqua look and feel that Apple provides for Java is nice but it still has many holes and to support things like the single menu bar application have to be coded to request it and manage it. In other words even with Java it isn't free of charge.

Expecting a Window application written to Window API to be able to even come close to looking like a Mac OS X application (including a single menu bar) is much more difficult.

 

[macthorough]

10.5 buitlin

just a rumor

Sure it's a rumor. I'm not totally sure but it makes sense. I've worked for apple for 3 years and it's the only logical step for them to take in regards to suporting windows/bootcamp otherwise people will use viurtul PC or the crap they're posting about in the forum (which is usually what software companies do as they steal secrets from Apple and try to beat Apple to the punch). Apple's goal is to increase their market share. Adding windows to their already superior product lineup is the only way to catch up to MS. Dont be suprised if you see Safari for windows XP soon either (just a guees). I cannot wait till Apple releases 10.5 in November. I'm totally going to be stuck between buyin a Macbook, MacMini or a Playstation 3. I soon expect Windows to be a thing of the past due to the lack of luster of their OS. Apple just needs to get enough hard-headed windows users to switch to OS X. Where would all the cool gradmas be without iPhoto? They'd be ueing some crappy shareware program that downloads spyware and viruses in their .exe's. Needless to say theyd be withou a photoalbumn ont their harddrive. Since my Mac was stolen I've been working with PC's and I miss having the dock!

 

[macthorough]

UR Right

I wish it would focus on programs that are not available on the Mac. I would rather pay $500 for a Mac version than run some crappy Windows version of the same app for free.

Also OS/2 wasn't that much different than Windows for 90% of the people out there. At least you can see the differences with OSX with boot times, visual eye candy, speed, and unique software.

I don't know what you or anyone on this website knows about macs to the the history of macs. but gates stole the idea of windows from Apple. Back when apples dominated in schools everwhere with the burnt up green screens...Jobs was planning on leaving apple and staring his own computer/sofware company based on GUI. his goal was to infest the world with computers so everyone can network and whatever. well when he left apple he stole the layout of the OS already in place by apple. fortunetly he succeeded and almost ran apple aground. once jobs took over and created the OS X the OS that "you'd want to lick" apple began it's comback. as history repeat itself expect Windows Vista to look a lot like OS X.

 

[macthorough]

for real

Full windows compatibility without windows... screw boot camp and virtualization - this would be the holy grail.

i know it's only some apps for now, but it will grow. This is the way to go.

u mean no windows at all just OS X that will work with product spec'd for windows?

 

[zephead]

Since my Mac was stolen I've been working with PC's and I miss having the dock!

I have Windows, and I use RK Launcher which is a really good dock IMO. And since the stuff you drag onto it isn't exactly Mac-like, there's help for that too! osx-e.com has 1400 Tiger PNG's you can use for the dock.

 

[dicklacara]

mmmmm.... how do you spell alpha

 

[mark!]

mmmmm.... how do you spell alpha

soomeone said this alreadyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

 

[eric_n_dfw]

OS/2 would have lived if Microsoft hadn't illegaly used their monopoly-powers..

OS/2 rocked!

As a former OS/2 3.x (Warp) user, I'd say IBM's schizophrenic marketing and iron fisted tactics when MicroSoft was working on it with them was as much to blame as illegal tactics by one or the other. I think everything shady that MS learned to do was from the example of "Big Blue".

By the time Win95 came out, IBM was selling PC's with it by default while their OS/2 adds were few-and-far between.

 

[garfield2002]

Apple won't use WINE in Leopard, it would be a support nightmare.

A couple years ago I interned with a company that only used Linux. From that experience I decided to delve into Linux in my spare time and WINE was part of that experimentation. At the time I simply wanted to use Office/Word, because StarOffice did not produce compatible files that others could read.

In a nutshell, WINE was extremely buggy, and aside from opening the program nothing else really worked as it was supposed to. Now in the intervening time, I am sure that many many improvements have been made to WINE in terms of functionality and compatibility. However even after reading the MS Office compatibility site for crossover, so kindly provided by vinow, it brought back many bad memories.

To get ONE program running 100% in WINE is not a small task. By the time you get it working (or it may never work), a new version of that program will have been released with a whole set of new problems. You are always going to be one step behind and playing catch up. Now we all acknowlege that MS programs are buggy in their own right, now add the bugs of crossover on top and you've got a support nightmare for Apple. Can you imagine a new Leopard user calling Apple wondering why XXXX.exe (dumb PC program) is not working properly in OS X. If this type of native windows application support were built into Leopard that user would be within his/her right to call Apple for support. Logically I do not think that Apple will take on the responsibility of maintaing something like WINE for OS X. It is just too much of a comittment.

In my opinion Apple has already revealed a great solution with Boot Camp. Parallels can also be considered a similar solution. It give OS X users the option to run Windows, but limits Apple's liability. Apple provides the hardware support for Windows, however if a program doesn't work it's not Apple's fault. Blame windows and buy the OS X version of the software.

 

[Scruff]

Any solution that requires me to buy 2 OS's is a bad solution. I want to be able to use Steam, for example, without having to run Windows, or a 'Windows Window'. I just want to click on the icon, and have it run. I don't want to have to have downloaded a special version that came out 6 months later, I want to run the same software.

A tall order, maybe, but I shouldn't have to compromise on this, it should just work. If doing this meant Mac devs stopped making Mac only software, then that'd be great, they'd be making the same software for a wider audience, Hell, the WHOLE audience. I mean, we're never going to convince EVERY Dev to rewrite their code for us, and I'm certainly not alone in not wanting to have to own two OSs.

Boot Camp is a temporary solution, at best.