Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
generik said:
Because you can't resist clicking on that EXE attachment in your email like a bug is drawn to a candle?

Jeez, there are so many good reasons why WINE is a good thing.

You don't even know me. I have 25 years in the IT business, and have forgotten more about PC's than you now know. So now that your callous disregard and rude replies for other peoples opinions is known, tell me that it's IMPOSSIBLE for a virus to be developed for Vista that needs no "idiot" to click on an ".exe".
 
kingtj said:
Maybe YOU don't have a reason to run Windows, ever, on your Mac - but acting like your personal situation should apply to the rest of the Mac using world is total B.S.

I'd have to agree with you there... it's just that how many things will you want one Intel Mac to do? All that stuff you mentioned? I like redundancy. But you are right... there is a certain number of users that could benefit from the subject of this topic.
 
sehix said:
Nobody says *you* have to use it, do they?

I have one critical application, Adobe FrameMaker, that I've been using at work since before Adobe bought the original company out.

Adobe has dropped it on Mac OS. Since I still need to use it, why should I have to buy a PC to run FrameMaker (*everything* else I need to do I can do in Mac OS X), when I could run it on one of my Macs using Darwine?

It's no skin off your nose.

Of COURSE not! Much like music, the various flavors of computing is a joy to explore. But isn't there another solution? And you're willing to run the risk of meltdown to run FRAMEMAKER? When it bursts into flames, my nose skin will still be intact.
 
cgc said:
Just because YOU don't need to run Windows odoesn't mean WE don't need it. I have two applications I need to run: a form editor/filler program and a study guide program that is mandatory for me to advance at work. I run both under VPX but that's painfully slow. WINE would be great for hose uses...other than that it's OS X all the time.

You evidently didn't actually READ my post.
Please review it.
I JUST don't trust Windows enough to have it meet my Mac. Get the $250.00 Wal-Mart box... or not.
 
MacsRgr8 said:
Are the Mac-specific grfx cards in the Mac-Tels supported by DirectX using WINE?

Sounds like you're not getting what WINE does. It's not Windows, and it's not an emulator. Supporting graphics cards is a non-issue and irrelevant. It's about the APIs. If a Windows program wants to draw a box on the screen for example, it calls Windows routines for drawing a box, which WINE re-implements on OS X, so the OS X box-drawing functions are used instead. That's why the close gadgets on windows on WINE are in the right place...when run on Windows, the programs say "make a window on the screen and put a close gadget on it." They don't actually draw all the pixels themselves. So Windows goes and does its own thing (wrongly, of course. 😉 ). But when that program is run on OS X and says "make a window on the screen and put a close gadget on it", the OS X window routines are called instead, and you get what you'd expect.

(Note that I'm simplifying. WINE is an X11 app, so Windows calls are actually getting mapped to X11 calls, which in turn are mapped onto OS X calls. It would certainly be possible to make an OS X native version of WINE, but it would require quite a bit of work.)

--Eric
 
kingtj said:
Sure, viruses will come out for Vista in no time, just as they have for every other version of Windows and MS-DOS. But generally, these things don't just fly onto your computer at random and infect you.

"Generally" isn't good enough.
And I have first-hand experience with JUST THAT on a rather expensive weather station PC. Too detailed to explain here, but it's one of the main reasons I stand by my sentence "Windows is an abomination", and have in fact banned it from my network. My several hundred users said "Thank you", as they were glad to escape their home PC's by coming to work.
 
I still think the only people who will be benefiting from WINE are the type of people who only use Windows for 1 or 2 small tasks (and the die hard Linux geeks). After all if you really need windows so badly just buy a cheap Dell or a cheaper white box.......

Still with that said, there seems to be some rather interesting WINE opportunities 🙂
 
Okay, Looking at some of my posts, I have to admit I MIGHT look like a dick to some, but I am not. I'm actually a decent guy.
Sorry for the confusion, and keep on computing.
🙂
 
DeathChill said:
Well, they aren't Mac-specific in the first place. They use standard PC (well, notebook) video cards. This means video cards for Mac's will get much cheaper. 🙂

Sorry, they are just as Mac-specific as they've always been. They have Mac ROMs in them; ATI themselves say so. Nothing at all has changed with video cards.

Also, for the guy who says that the CPU has anything to do with virus immunity/security: you're an idiot.

Not really; x86 used to have problems with memory not being designated as executable or not, so you could point at any arbitrary address and execute whatever was there. PPC never did that. Apparently x86 doesn't anymore either, but I haven't paid too close attention.

* * *

As for the Marketshare Myth: Um, HELLO, if that was all there was to it, then OS 9 would never have had viruses either! But it does! I know most people understand that, but there seem to be a few people who refuse to get it.

--Eric
 
Eric5h5 said:
Sorry, they are just as Mac-specific as they've always been. They have Mac ROMs in them; ATI themselves say so. Nothing at all has changed with video cards.


--Eric
Uh, where'd you hear this? What I understand is that they are standard video cards with EFI-compatible firmware (which is going to be a standard soon enough, and is definitely not Mac-specific).

Stuff certainly must have changed because Apple is using generic x86 hardware, so the card is obviously a normal video card. However, it just does not have the support for the old VGA standard, as it supports the new EFI standard UGA. This does not make it Mac specific at all, it just makes it more future proof. xD
 
Les Kern said:
You don't even know me. I have 25 years in the IT business, and have forgotten more about PC's than you now know. So now that your callous disregard and rude replies for other peoples opinions is known, tell me that it's IMPOSSIBLE for a virus to be developed for Vista that needs no "idiot" to click on an ".exe".

Yes sir, you are truly experienced. Millions of viruses are floating around on Linux PCs as we speak... oh wait.

Little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and I believe you have reached your limitation and is time for you to step back and retire. Tell me, what are the main security loopholes on Windows? Why would WINE promote it? Does Wine have the same HTML renderers that exist in Windows? No... Does Wine run applications by default in admin? No...

Oh and please don't give me that crap about deleting userhome folders, I can rig up something that can do that in a couple minutes. If you downloaded the app and run it, it is your own damned fault.
 
Les Kern said:
Of COURSE not! Much like music, the various flavors of computing is a joy to explore. But isn't there another solution? And you're willing to run the risk of meltdown to run FRAMEMAKER? When it bursts into flames, my nose skin will still be intact.

Oh nos! It will burst into flames and melt down! Omg! Daddy will not be able to do his job! Who will pay the bills now?! Will someone think of the babies?!???!?

Please, your paranoia and mental disorder aside, please find me a source and reference documenting that Windows virii are capable of propagating on WINE. Not Windows obviously, WINE. Thank you.
 
Les Kern said:
You evidently didn't actually READ my post.
Please review it.
I JUST don't trust Windows enough to have it meet my Mac. Get the $250.00 Wal-Mart box... or not.

Sorry, I hate to clutter my home. Can't imagine yours though.
 
Les Kern said:
"Generally" isn't good enough.
And I have first-hand experience with JUST THAT on a rather expensive weather station PC. Too detailed to explain here, but it's one of the main reasons I stand by my sentence "Windows is an abomination", and have in fact banned it from my network. My several hundred users said "Thank you", as they were glad to escape their home PC's by coming to work.

Yes, it is too detailed. Oh how convenient.
 
Where's apple????

Where is Apple during all of this? Why don't they contribute to some of these projects (ahem, openoffice, like the world needs another format, like iwork<I know, they're different, but still close>). It would be in their best interest to help these projects.
 
OK...I'll apologize in advance for my naivety. My mouth was watering as I read what it can do but I got lost in all the 'how it does it' jargon and rants on why some find it rediculous to want to do so. I HAVE to run windows for work as I'm sure many of you do. The only thing I need to do is run IE 6 with the ActiveX plug-in for it. Yep, that's all. Is this something I could do with this WINE thing without having windows at all? Do you need an intel Mac to do it?
 
nichos said:
Where is Apple during all of this? Why don't they contribute to some of these projects (ahem, openoffice, like the world needs another format, like iwork<I know, they're different, but still close>). It would be in their best interest to help these projects.

Apple isn't in the business of contributing to open source.

Actually, that reminded me of something John C. Dvorak threw out there on the latest TWiT podcast... He is suggesting that as Steve Jobs moves on to bigger and better things at the Big Mouse, much like sustaining the PPC was an uphill battle, maintaining OSX will become a draining uphill battle that just can't be won (see IBM OS/2). And as a result OSX could go away and/or be turned over to the open source community ala Fedora Core; Apple would still offer it but not spend as much energy on it as it does today, and would also offer Windows on the boxes. This dovetails with the Yellow Box rumors quite nicely.

Having been an OS/2 fan in the old days, I can see it happening. It's hard to win software publishers over to your side. It's hard for big publishers to justify two versions of their application when one version serves 95% of the market. It doesn't matter how great your alternative OS is. The fact that Adobe isn't JUMPING to get native apps out is a big red flag.

It might take 5 years, but it may indeed happen.
 
Why WINE and Intel "could" pose more of a security threat.

Someone stated a while back that virus are not linked to the processor architecture, but to the operating system, meaning that if you are running WINE on a Mac, you should be safe from viruses.

This isn't, strictly speaking, true. Most viruses exploit security flaws known as buffer over-runs. Basically, a buffer over-run occurs when the programmer makes a mistake and allows the copying of too much data into a buffer of a fixed size. This extra data ends up being copied over the top of code. If you can write just the right data, so that the extra bytes actually represent a program that the processor can execute, the next time that the processor tries to run the overwritten code, it will actually be executing the virus instead. That's how viruses work. To make this happen is quite a technical feat, which is why most hardline hackers are considered to be guru programmers (as opposed to scriptkiddies that use tools written by gurus).

When the Mac changed to the Intel processor, it all of a sudden became a whole lot easier to write a virus that could attack a Mac and a PC at the same time. The virus code would "just" need to change it's API calls to those of a Mac. This would involve changing an address, and perhaps the order in which certain parameters are placed on the stack before calling the API routine. Certainly much easier than having to worry about translating all of the different op-codes etc.

If you then throw WINE into the mix, the only thing that needs to be changed to make a virus PC and Mac compatible would be file directory stuctures and things like that. Well, assuming that the loader in WINE copies the loader in Windows pretty well.

So, whilst it is true that WINE and an Intel processor don't mean that a Mac can be hammered by PC viruses, it does substantially reduce the amount of work needed to make a virus capable of infecting both computers at once.

My advice to those that don't want to have their Intel Mac nailed by a PC virus would be to not use WINE. Opt for VirtualPC (when it becomes available) instead. That way viruses can only wreck whatever limited work you absolutely have to do on the PC - your Mac will remain quarantined.

I work in IT security (my company does DRM software), and I often have a look at viruses (and DRM hacks) to see how the hackers have hacked the system (so that I can protect my products from the same flaws). Ironically, I do this work on an iMac G5 using Virtual PC, because when a virus destroys my hard drive, it takes me five seconds to copy over the hard drive with a saved copy, and reboot - with my Virtual PC back in pristine condition.

Virtualisation is great technology for staying safe, and if it's emulating at the same time as virtualising, you're even safer still...

Something to think about.
 
The Mac is here to stay

janstett said:
Apple isn't in the business of contributing to open source.

Ummm, yeah they are... The entire OS core - Darwin - is Open Source, for example. As are a whole load of applicatin layer stuff, like Bonjour...

janstett said:
Actually, that reminded me of something John C. Dvorak threw out there on the latest TWiT podcast... He is suggesting that as Steve Jobs moves on to bigger and better things at the Big Mouse, much like sustaining the PPC was an uphill battle, maintaining OSX will become a draining uphill battle that just can't be won (see IBM OS/2). And as a result OSX could go away and/or be turned over to the open source community ala Fedora Core; Apple would still offer it but not spend as much energy on it as it does today, and would also offer Windows on the boxes. This dovetails with the Yellow Box rumors quite nicely.

I really can't see this happening. Apple as a company works because they actually sell physical boxes. You can't copy a physical box by clicking and dragging, and Apple knows it only all too well. The Mac experience, where everything just works, comes about because they aren't trying to support 50 squillion different hardware platforms with their software. Their testing is hence more rigourous (less of a chance of coming unstuck because they never tried the combination of Driver A, Driver B and Driver X)

And while Apple is still capable of selling millions of Macs a year, there will always be software companies willing to write software for them. If you sell a product for $50 dollars to every tenth Mac owner, you are going to make profits in the order of 100s of millions of dollars...

Something to think about: the number of Macs in operation today is around about the same as the number of PCs in existence in the mid-90s when Microsoft became huge.
 
janstett said:
Apple isn't in the business of contributing to open source.

Actually, that reminded me of something John C. Dvorak threw out there on the latest TWiT podcast... He is suggesting that as Steve Jobs moves on to bigger and better things at the Big Mouse, much like sustaining the PPC was an uphill battle, maintaining OSX will become a draining uphill battle that just can't be won (see IBM OS/2). And as a result OSX could go away and/or be turned over to the open source community ala Fedora Core; Apple would still offer it but not spend as much energy on it as it does today, and would also offer Windows on the boxes. This dovetails with the Yellow Box rumors quite nicely.

Having been an OS/2 fan in the old days, I can see it happening. It's hard to win software publishers over to your side. It's hard for big publishers to justify two versions of their application when one version serves 95% of the market. It doesn't matter how great your alternative OS is. The fact that Adobe isn't JUMPING to get native apps out is a big red flag.

It might take 5 years, but it may indeed happen.

if Apple stops delivering OSX and moves to Winblows i will start using a pencil and a notebook again
 
Les Kern said:
Why in the HELL do I want to run Windows, ever, on a Mac?

This isn't about running Windows, this is about running Windows-apps, comprende?

And I can see why some people would want to buy a Mac only to run some other OS on it.

And why are too many idiots spending their time thinking of making it work? Jesus, what a waste of effort.

Who the HELL are you calling them idiots?! If they want to work on this, what grounds do YOU have to tell them that "No, this is stupid! Do something else!" I would propably find many things YOU do to be stupid and pointless, yet I don't start to demand that you should not be doing those things. And if/when other people find their efforts worthwhile, that alone makes their project useful. And maybe they are doing it for themselves, ever though of that? Maybe they just want to run few Windows-apps on OS X. What's so bad about that?

This is speculation, but I'd bet my house that the first REAL Vista virus is waiting for Vista's release. So why would I want to destroy my productivity so I can run that vertical marketing crap-application that's only available on a crap-PC? I'll buy the crap-box from evil Wal-Mart. When it dies,
I toss it, much like a used Preperation-H towlette.

Pipe it down, fanboy.

There is no "best" in the WIN world. It's an abomination. Vista on a Mac is like having a mole on your skin that might one day turn to cancer.

This is not about running Vista on Mac you idiot, this is about running Windows APPS on OS X!

Hell, rabid fanboys like you make me want to buy Macintel, only to make Windows ME run on it somehow. Just to piss the fanatic Mac-heads off.

That said, I AM considering to buy more Apple-hardware, in order to run Linux on 'em. What are you going to do about it? Punch me in the face?
 
DeathChill said:
Uh, where'd you hear this? What I understand is that they are standard video cards with EFI-compatible firmware (which is going to be a standard soon enough, and is definitely not Mac-specific).

MWSF: IMG Chats With ATI

"Notable facts include the fact that both the Mobility and the standard X1600 use the same driver sets, and that future optimization should be made easier by the fact that both the Mac and PC sides will be using the same basic sets of hardware. When asked about using a PC ATI card in a Mac, however, it was pointed out that the Mac cards still feature different firmware sets as well as use different drivers."

ezekielrage_99 said:
It's a retorical acronym, and great nerd thing to add to society.....

It's a recursive acronym. 😉 A rhetorical acronym...no such thing....

janstett said:
Apple isn't in the business of contributing to open source.

*cough*Safari*cough*

It's hard to win software publishers over to your side. It's hard for big publishers to justify two versions of their application when one version serves 95% of the market.

Except that OS X commands much more than 5% in a number of markets. I don't think Adobe, for example (who's not exactly a small publisher), would like to see such a huge chunk of their income disappear.

--Eric
 
SiliconAddict said:
Not all games use Direct X. Some are OpenGL. Conversely MANY, MANY, MANY do, and as such I wouldn't expect these games to run at all or if they do they will use the CPU for graphics acceleration, which will make you..
mecry.gif

WINE runs many Direct3D-games on Linux just fine. It converts the Direct3D-calls to OpenGL-calls, so that those games work with full 3D hardware-acceleration. AFAIK, there is a performance hit, but many people are playing Max Payne (for example) just fine on Linux through Wine.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.