Windows on Mac and Mac OS X on PCs?

[Evangelion]

So you'll go out and buy an Apple to run Windows on? Why not save a little cash and just buy a Windows machine to run Windows on?

Because Apple-hardware is so much more nicer? Instead of buying a BMW, I could save some money and buy a Ford, right? Both could move my ass around. Yet, I would much rather have a BMW.

I'm not talking about getting a cheap Dell or whatever. You can get a great computer with all the bells and whistles you want and STILL get it cheaper than you would with Mac hardware.

Show me a PC that can match the elegance of a PowerBook? Or Mac Mini? Or PowerMac? I HAVE looked around. I have even looked at those uber-Expensive Sony Vaios. And they still don't match the elegance or sheer coolness of a PowerBook! Show me a PC-laptop that has a case made of aluminium. Show me a PC-laptop that has a backlit-keyboard.

Yes the gap is closing more and more on the price and that's a good thing. But still, why buy and Apple and not use OSX on it? All the arguments about "well, some people need Windows to run blah blah blah" are all moot. Need to run Windows? Buy a frickin Windows machine!

Nope, I would rather buy an Apple . Besides, I wouldn't run Windows on it. And even more: what if I want to run OS X as well? Should I buy a Mac for OS X, and another computer for Linux/Windows?

And I should add here, the above that I wrote is for people that want to use Windows EXCLUSIVELY on Mac hardware. If you're dual booting to use a program or play a game only, then that's certainly different. But as you know, there are some individuals out there that want a Windows machine only inside a Mac machine...which is just insane imho.

It is not. Apple-hardware just is very, very cool. The design is drop-dead sexy! So why SHOULDN'T I buy a Mac with an intent of NOT running OS X on it? Because the hardware is more expensive? Good design costs money. And there's a saying in Finland: "Poor people can't afford cheap things". Meaning: If something is very cheap, it's propably low-quality. Spending a bit more money, saves you money on the long run. I don't know about you, but I'm prepared to pay for good design and good quality. Of course I could buy some el-cheapo PC with similar specs and performance that costs less. It would be cheap, and it would LOOK and FEEL cheap as well! Not so with Mac.

Hell, I have a Mac Mini. it's the cheapest computer Apple sells. And it too feels like a hi-end piece of equipment!

 

[ThomasM]

you asked for a pc laptop that could be compared to a powerbook when speaking of elegance etc. Asus is the key word

 

[mk14]

Doesn't EFI include a compatibility to run operating systems that require BIOS?

If not (or Apple did not build it into their iMac), would it be possible to use a bootloader like ELILO (for Linux) to boot Windows XP?

Michael

 

[Evangelion]

you asked for a pc laptop that could be compared to a powerbook when speaking of elegance etc. Asus is the key word

Asus? Their laptops have pretty good features and price, but I can't locate the elegance. I have played around with them in stores, and they seem just like any other PC-laptop. No, their Ferrari-laptop is not elegant, it's hideous.

 

[ksgant]

Show me a PC that can match the elegance of a PowerBook? Or Mac Mini? Or PowerMac? I HAVE looked around. I have even looked at those uber-Expensive Sony Vaios. And they still don't match the elegance or sheer coolness of a PowerBook! Show me a PC-laptop that has a case made of aluminium. Show me a PC-laptop that has a backlit-keyboard.

You're just talking about a pretty face then. I care not one iota about how sleek something looks...or is made out of aluminium or even about laptops...I need more power than any laptop can give me for one. You're talking about looks. I'm talking about something I actually use to work with and get on with my life. It could look like a PCjr for all I care as long as it worked when I wanted to work and did what I wanted in a stable, fast way. Your analogy of BMW and Ford doesn't make sense at all. These are computers...talk about computers.

Nope, I would rather buy an Apple . Besides, I wouldn't run Windows on it. And even more: what if I want to run OS X as well? Should I buy a Mac for OS X, and another computer for Linux/Windows?

Then why even respond to my post? Did you bother reading it? I was arguing why buy an Apple then put Windows on it....and you JUST SAID you wouldn't run Windows on it...so where's your beef?

It is not. Apple-hardware just is very, very cool. The design is drop-dead sexy! So why SHOULDN'T I buy a Mac with an intent of NOT running OS X on it? Because the hardware is more expensive? Good design costs money. And there's a saying in Finland: "Poor people can't afford cheap things". Meaning: If something is very cheap, it's propably low-quality. Spending a bit more money, saves you money on the long run. I don't know about you, but I'm prepared to pay for good design and good quality. Of course I could buy some el-cheapo PC with similar specs and performance that costs less. It would be cheap, and it would LOOK and FEEL cheap as well! Not so with Mac.

Again with the style and looks. Do you get Apple hardware to show off or something? Is it a fashion statement to you? If so, hey, cool. Me, I have work to do and need something that helps me do my work quickly and efficiently and not get in my way. Computers are tools....they're not fashion statements. To me anyway. Also, every computer I build myself is not cheap and feels cheap...but I guess it's not as beautiful and sleek as you would make it...not that being beautiful and sleek has anything to do with actually crunching numbers.

Again, that's just me. If you're into that, say it loud say it proud!

 

[heisetax]

Why run Windows on a Mac

why would you run Windows on a Mac. thats stupid. runing OS X on PC would make sense. running xp on an mac would be like be like driving a ferrari with a honda civic engine in it

In order to know why many have or want to run Windows on a Mac you need to get into the real business world. Everyone does not do what you do. Many applications are available only on Windows. Many others will not do what we need with the Mac version & thus the Windows version must be run. Many times this is not of our chice. In order to keep our Mac usuable at many businesses we must be able to run the companies own software that is not open to the public, thus there will never be a Mac version.

We could purchase a separate Windows computer, but our stomaches can only take so much. Many of us have used our Macs since 1984 & support the Mac more than even you do. We just have to do our job.

I spend most of my time preparing income taxes. Over ten years ago Intuit cut support for Turbo Tax for Mac Pro. This left doing one of three things. The first would be a total switch to a Windows machine & software. The second choice worked for a few years & that was to use the consumer level TaxCut & run it on the Mac. The last was to write my own income tax prep program. This I started on before Intuit stopped Mac support. This is a very time consuming for only one person to do. At present I still must use a Windows program to do my efiling, as I haven't finished the process of having my efile program run correctly. For this reason I do not stress efiling, keeping the numbers down to about 10% of my work. Usually that is the easier 10% also.

I don't really want to run an actual Windows computer on a daily basis. I do that in the off season when I take 2-4 micro computer courses. Most of which are only indirectly related to the Mac.

Open yourself up to what others want or must do. I wouldn't expect many to agree with what I do & how I do it. But remember we have Macs. That means that we are to "think Different."

Have fun with your Mac.

Bill the TaxMan

 

[demallien]

You're just talking about a pretty face then. I care not one iota about how sleek something looks...or is made out of aluminium or even about laptops...I need more power than any laptop can give me for one. You're talking about looks. I'm talking about something I actually use to work with and get on with my life. It could look like a PCjr for all I care as long as it worked when I wanted to work and did what I wanted in a stable, fast way. Your analogy of BMW and Ford doesn't make sense at all. These are computers...talk about computers.

You know, that's a rather condescending post. I'm as hard-core a power user as you can get, I code for Macs, PCs, Linux, and embedded environments. I can crack most software protection schemes and my job is to create new ones, so I am used to working at all levels of the computer, from machine code through to .NET. But I can tell you right now that the fact that the Mac is a very beautiful, well-manufactured computer is most definately one of the reasons I buy Macs.

There are other factors, such as the fact that I too actually have to work, and it annoys the hell out of me when I have to waste half an hour of my life configuring my PC to do something that is hould just do automatically, like my Mac does.

Beauty sells products. The entire fashion industry works on this principle, as does the high-end car industry, to name just a few. Big bucks. But my point is that just because YOU happen to think that GHz under the bonnet is the only thing that matters, there's a whole world of people out there that disagree. Lighten up.

 

[Evangelion]

You're just talking about a pretty face then. I care not one iota about how sleek something looks...or is made out of aluminium or even about laptops...I need more power than any laptop can give me for one.

To each on his own then. Some just want lots of performance, others want something more from their machines than mere performance. I have no idea really what I would do with some uber-powerful laptop, being "fast enough" is... well, enough.

What I do care is the overall quality. I like the computer to feel nice. I like the nice touches. I have a HP-laptop which propably runs rings around the PPC-powerbooks. But it feels flimsy and cheap. I would MUCH rather have a PowerBook!

You're talking about looks.

I'm talking about more than just mere looks.

IThese are computers...talk about computers.

I am. And I maintain that there's more to computer than mere performance. If performance is all that matters, then I assume that you have one of those hideous semi-portable "mobile-workstations"? I mean, they have more power than you could ever dream of! And they are mobile (well, theoretically at least)!

Then why even respond to my post? Did you bother reading it? I was arguing why buy an Apple then put Windows on it....and you JUST SAID you wouldn't run Windows on it...so where's your beef?

I wouldn't run Windows there, I would run Linux. Linux, Windows.... Where's the difference? I would still be using the computer in a way that is was not designed for.

Again with the style and looks. Do you get Apple hardware to show off or something? Is it a fashion statement to you?

*sigh* you just don't "get it". Like it or not, some people LIKE things that are beautiful and nice. But there's more to it than mere looks. It's also about what the computer FEELS like. It's nothing tangible really, but when I have held a PB, and compared it to some PC-laptop, the PB just FEELS better. Yes, things like these matter.

If so, hey, cool. Me, I have work to do and need something that helps me do my work quickly and efficiently and not get in my way. Computers are tools....they're not fashion statements.

Cars are tools as well. yet some people buy Lexuses, BMW's and the like, instead of Fords and Ladas.

Also, every computer I build myself is not cheap and feels cheap

You build your own laptops?

but I guess it's not as beautiful and sleek as you would make it...not that being beautiful and sleek has anything to do with actually crunching numbers.

You can have a machine which is high-quality, sleek and powerful. Yes, it might cost a bit more (although PowerMac is quite competetive on the price-arena), but like it or not: some of us just want to use nice things. Sure you could just use some generic tower-PC. Go right ahead, I have one as well! But I would MUCH rather have something NICE. I appreciate good engineering and design, you apperently do not.

Oh well, to each on his own.

 

[strange days]

Who needs to program for the Mac then?

well, more people would have OSX and Macs; current developers wouldn't drop support, instead, they would sell more...

...and XP developers would be tempted to develop native for OSX considering a share of their users are now on Macs...

it's a 50/50 thing, but i think there's more to win rather than loose on the software side; imagine what it could do to hardware sales though...

 

[TangoCharlie]

Vice-versa or just vice?

why would you run Windows on a Mac. thats stupid. runing OS X on PC would make sense. running xp on an mac would be like be like driving a ferrari with a honda civic engine in it

I'm interested in both....

I'm a Windows developer and Mac lover. I'll need a new laptop this year and I would love to get a MacBook Pro running MacOS X and Windows. I couldn't ever get my work to buy a PowerBook for me... because I'm a Windows developer.

Perversely, if I did get a MacBook Pro (through work) I'd run OSX and Windows on it.... and... If I could, I'd install MacOS X on my old Compaq laptop for home use.

Similarly, when the intel "PoweMac" gets launched, I'll try to get one as my desktop at work.... and install WinXP/Vista on it!

ttfn

Tim.

 

[cameronius]

Windows on Mac

Hi, im new here.

Ive been reading the thread, and i searched through google to find anything of any use. im not an expert about computers, but what about BOCHS. It seems to do everything that needs to be done. what do yall think?

 

[tux]

VPC or VMware

When talking about running windows on a Mac, many think of VPC immediately. However I think VMware would have a better chance at running windows on a mac than VPC. VMware already works on intel based Unix (Linux) systems. It should not be too much more difficult to get it to work on MacOS since the underlying OS is a form of BSD unix (granted Linux is not BSD, but that would probably be an easier port, than porting the powerpc version of VPC onto intel)

Vmware, where are you? Are you listening?

 

[worldwearyeyes]

...

 

[SiliconAddict]

That doesn't make any sense. Companies make way more money on software sales than hardware sales. It costs next to nothing to burn an os onto a disk.

Companies also hit a wall at some point. Case in point: Microsoft. Many enterprise environments still aren't on XP or they are only now planning the migration. Microsoft has hit a concrete, reinforced, iron ceiling when it comes to OS sales. That is why they are going insane about product activation: because they are trying to squeeze water out of a rock. Vista is going to sell but for many 2000 and XP are good enough. Heck the only real way MS can get people to upgrade anymore is to use extortion tactics. Theoretically XP home’s support will end January 2007. That means if there is a critical patch released for XP Pro home user’s will be SOL. (I expect this to change as we get closer to the deadline.)
Do we really want Apple to get into a position where the majority of people are perfectly happy with the OS they have and never upgrade? IF Apple starts selling their OS to the average PC user at some point they are going to saturate the market and at that point cute features like Expose , dashboard, and spotlight, while cool, aren’t going to convince most Windows users to upgrade at which point Apple is then in the same position as Microsoft. I don’t know about you but that is a position I DO NOT want Apple in.

 

[dejo]

Hi, im new here.

Ive been reading the thread, and i searched through google to find anything of any use. im not an expert about computers, but what about BOCHS. It seems to do everything that needs to be done. what do yall think?

Apparently, Bochs is quite slow because it is just an emulator.

 

[MacTruck]

Companies also hit a wall at some point. Case in point: Microsoft. Many enterprise environments still aren't on XP or they are only now planning the migration. Microsoft has hit a concrete, reinforced, iron ceiling when it comes to OS sales. That is why they are going insane about product activation: because they are trying to squeeze water out of a rock. Vista is going to sell but for many 2000 and XP are good enough. Heck the only real way MS can get people to upgrade anymore is to use extortion tactics. Theoretically XP home’s support will end January 2007. That means if there is a critical patch released for XP Pro home user’s will be SOL. (I expect this to change as we get closer to the deadline.)
Do we really want Apple to get into a position where the majority of people are perfectly happy with the OS they have and never upgrade? IF Apple starts selling their OS to the average PC user at some point they are going to saturate the market and at that point cute features like Expose , dashboard, and spotlight, while cool, aren’t going to convince most Windows users to upgrade at which point Apple is then in the same position as Microsoft. I don’t know about you but that is a position I DO NOT want Apple in.

I agree. That is why microsoft makes the Xbox 360.

 

[dejo]

That doesn't make any sense. Companies make way more money on software sales than hardware sales. It costs next to nothing to burn an os onto a disk.

Look at Apple's financials. They make way more from their hardware sales than their software sales. Last quarter it was 1,611 $m in revenue from CPUs vs. 294 $m from "Software & Other".

 

[MacTruck]

Look at Apple's financials. They make way more from their hardware sales than their software sales. Last quarter it was 1,611 $m in revenue from CPUs vs. 294 $m from "Software & Other".

Ofcourse, thats because their software only runs on a mac which comes with that software. Now if that software ran on any computer out there those figures would change drastically.

 

[macintel4me]

Ofcourse, thats because their software only runs on a mac which comes with that software. Now if that software ran on any computer out there those figures would change drastically.

Yes, both software AND hardware!!

Anyone use iEmulator? Supposedly it's a Virtual PC/VMware-like product and available for MacBooks and Intel-based iMacs next month. It's $24 or something like that.

Source: http://www.macwindows.com/

 

[Krevnik]

Why is that? If they said they wouldn't do anything to stop people booting to Windows, why would they do that?

Booting to Windows will be an immense selling point for every potential switcher on the planet, to make it anything other than piss-easy would be idiotic.

Because they aren't doing anything to go out of their way and make it work either.

The CSM would need to have been written by Apple. What does Apple use in these new machines that needs it? Nothing. So why would they bother to spend time on a feature of the firmware /they/ don't need?

Once the 64-bit chips come out, and Vista comes out, it will be a moot point anyways.

The only problem is that early adopters won't be able to run Vista either (Vista's EFI support was limited to 64-bit, because the OEMs were including CSMs on the 32-bit models).

 

[maverick808]

Hi,

Well I don't know if the new MacBooks will run Windows or not. I suspect they will eventually.

Anyway, I went ahead and wrote possibly the first app for Windows running on a MacBook. It's a little app that simply makes Windows see a right-click when you hold down control and left click... just like on the Mac So you won't need an external mouse to use Windows when you get your MacBook.

However, I don't have any Windows machines with a monitor (all my PCs are headless) so I've only been able to test it over remote desktop.

I'd appreciate it if someone with a normal Windows machine could try it out and let me know if it works okay.

Please PM me if you're willing to try it out for me. Thanks.

Oh by the way you need .NET installed to run it.

 

[hasthespaz]

what i think

apple would not be apple with microsoft runing on it. blue screen ahoy! i think making windows run on an apple would ruin the apple image, same with apple on pc

 

[lamadude]

Here's the opinion from a windows user who just joined this forum.

-I use windows because I like to play games and as a simple college student I can't afford 2 computers. Therefor I need to have a windows pc

-For the moment I'm dual booting macosx together with win xp on my computer, it works perfectly. I don't feel good about not having paid for this version of macosx, and if apple where to release a pc version of mac I would defenitly buy it.

-Also, if apple releases a decent, gaming capable update for the iBook, and allows the installation of windows on it, I'm definitaly getting one, since I love the design of the apple laptops.

So in my case, if apple opens up towards pc users they are bound to get money.
If they release mac os x for pc I will pay for the software
If they allow windows on mac I will pay for the sofware AND the hardware
So either way they win, since for the moment they receive 0€ from me.

Oh one more thing, I think a lot of people in this forum are slightly exagerating the unstability of windows. I have had Windows installed on my pc for 5 years, and I never had virusses or adware. My system never crashes, at least in my experience windows xp is a very stable OS, as long as you don't do stupid things like opening every spam attachment you can find.

 

[OCOTILLO]

apple would not be apple with microsoft runing on it. blue screen ahoy! i think making windows run on an apple would ruin the apple image, same with apple on pc

This is kind of a silly attitude. There is a lot of good software out there that only runs on Windows. I do not mean games. I have software I can't run since I switched to Mac which I would be happy to be able to use. I see Garmin is going to support OSX soon, until that happens I can't update the maps on my Garmin GPS system for example.

 

[CholEoptera36]

The wonderful Paul Thurrott is claiming that the new macs will run Vista, but XP will have problems because of the new EFI (Extensible Firmware Interface) that will be in Leopard.

Paul supposedly bought a 20" iMac Core Duo today and is going to test the Vista beta versions he recieves to see what happens, he will be writing about his experience at his WinSuperSite.

Hope nobody else on here posted that yet, didn't really feel like reading through all the coments tonight. And not that most people care what Paul says here either, but interesting to watch somebody actually test this. You can read the article here:

http://www.windowsitpro.com/windowspaulthurrott/Article/ArticleID/49045/windowspaulthurrott_49045.html