“Apple’s switch to Intel processors and the Macs newfound ability to run Windows natively may lead to increased adoption in the home and small business marketplace, but will probably not translate to an increased presence in large-scale corporate environments, say industry analysts. Needham and Company analyst Charles Wolf recently predicted that Apple’s market share could triple in the home,” Mathew Honan reports for Macworld.
“Although Boot Camp will allow Mac users to boot up into either the Windows or the Macintosh OS and run Windows applications natively, in order to switch, they must shut down and restart their machines. This reduces productivity since a user must quit working in all open applications and wait while the machine shuts down and restarts,” Honan reports.
“The productivity issue might help explain some aspects of Apple’s new ads. In its new ‘Get a Mac’ campaign, the ‘Touche’ ad promotes Parallels, rather than Boot Camp, as an option for people who want to run Windows on their Macs. It further promotes Parallels on its ‘Get a Mac – Run Windows’ promotional page. Wolf, who had not seen the page prior to speaking with Macworld, says that while he thinks there is much to be said for dual booting, he was glad to see the company pushing Parallels,” Honan reports.
“‘I am so pleased to see [Apple promoting Parallels],’ said Wolf. ‘I had a talk with Phil Schiller at the opening of the 5th Avenue Apple Store, and I asked him the question, ‘will Apple include a virtualization solution in [the next version of Mac OS X] Leopard.’ He said ‘absolutely not, the R&D would be prohibitive and we’re not going to do it. Our solution is dual boot.’ When I saw Parallels come out, I thought Apple would dis it, but this page suggests that Apple will actively support it.’ Wolf noted that other virtualization solutions are on the way, as well, from companies such as CodeWeaver, and that Apple should embrace them,” Honan reports.
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “LinuxGuy” for the heads up.]
Advertisements:
• Introducing the super-fast, blogging, podcasting, do-everything-out-of-the-box MacBook. Starting at just $1099.
• Get the new iMac with Intel Core Duo for as low as $31 A MONTH with Free shipping!
• Get the MacBook Pro with Intel Core Duo for as low as $47 A MONTH with Free Shipping!
• Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
Related articles:
Ars Technica review: Parallels Desktop 1.0 for Mac OS X – July 10, 2006
O’Reilly MacDevCenter Review: Parallels Desktop for the Mac is ‘amazing’ – June 28, 2006
ComputerRentals.com announces record Q2 sales based on high demand for Apple Macs – June 28, 2006
O’Reilly MacDevCenter Review: Parallels Desktop for the Mac is ‘amazing’ – June 28, 2006
Forced to run Windows? Make Parallels Desktop run faster – June 27, 2006
ComputerRentals.com announces record Q2 sales based on high demand for Apple Macs – June 28, 2006
Apple could buy Parallels with petty cash and say ‘buy a Mac, get two computers for price of one’ – June 22, 2006
Apple ‘Get a Mac’ web page pushes Parallels Desktop instead of Apple’s own Boot Camp – June 18, 2006
Parallels Desktop for Mac goes final; simultaneously run Mac OS, Windows, Linux on Intel-powered Mac – June 15, 2006
Which is better for running Windows programs on Macs, Boot Camp or Parallels Desktop? – May 25, 2006
Washington Times: Parallels Workstation 2.1 ran Windows XP ‘quite nicely’ on an Apple Macintosh – April 18, 2006
Dude, you got a Dell? What are you, stupid? Only Apple Macs run both Mac OS X and Windows! – April 05, 2006
Why buy a Dell when Apple’s Intel-based computers will run both Mac OS X and Windows? – June 08, 2005
Once upon a time: “Hey, Steve Jobs, will you ever use Intel in a Mac?”
“Absolutely not.”
how ‘prohibitive’ could the R&D be if Parallels managed it?
doesn’t Apple have enough in it’s warchest to acquire Parallels or at least found the R&D?
How can we get Macs into the corporate world on a larger scale? I’d say get the government on board first, and the contracting companies will follow. Once they’re in, more will follow. The government is such a cash cow for the technology sector that I think the industry would follow their demands.
let’s hope he’s lying. Or let’s hope they’re just planning to buy Parallels.
Dual-Boot is our solution. Two weeks later, Apple is marketing parallels.
Apple is in full “deny, deny, deny, launch!” mode.
But perhaps Phil isn’t lying after all. This could be Phil’s cryptic way of saying that Apple won’t need to have Windows installed at all on a Mac to run Windows apps.
No I think it’s great. They let that one go out into the world to make someone rich. I think it’s a gesture to programmers everywhere. Apple doesn’t have the best rep as far as incorporating ideas into their OS.
Just to clear something up, Codeweavers solution is not “virtualization”, they have adopted the WINE libraries to emulate Win32 native calls which allows them to run Windows applications under non-Windows OSes such as Linux and now Mac OS X.
R&D is cheap when you let the market come out with competing companies’ solutions – then when there is a clear leader, buy it and integrate it.
AS an AAPL share holder, I would like to see Apple allow other companies to share soem of the R&D risk of the superios OS X platform. MS has used this model and while their implementation has been less than acceptable, it makes good feduciary sense.
I would welcome a “Fast User’s” type of switching between the two OS’es. Both on at the same time, able to access both either with a key command, Apple had a DOS card in the 90’s that did the same thing. They’d have to fix the speed though.
Schmutz!, you can do that now with Parallels and Virtue Desktops.
If you can’t run Windows apps on 10.5 either through virtualization or whatever, where’s the incentive to buy it when you can do boot camp on Tiger?
I’m wondering what they’re going to show next month that will compel people to spend $130 on an upgrade to the next OS. An improved spotlight? An even more stable operating system? Better Widgets? Easy Automator?
Sorry, but unless they come up with some melt my socks options at the WWDC, I’ll probably stick with 10.4 as ‘good enough’, and I suspect that other people will be the same…
I’m surprised to see Schiller make such a comment. I wonder if SJ gave him hell for that.
Why would apple want to actively put something in the OS that tells developers not to bother making a Mac version?
Third party solutions is a better alternative and if Parellels runs this well for a first generation than it will only get better.
Wine will further that advantage. The Company themselves adding this to it’s own OS would be shooting itself in the foot.
No doubt some manufacturers will not make Mac versions of their software if these programs become more viable anyway. Or they will use them as an excuse to not bother. In most cases it won’t matter but as usual, games will sufer.
Hmmm.
“The productivity issue might help explain some aspects of Apple’s new ads. In its new ‘Get a Mac’ campaign, the ‘Touche’ ad promotes Parallels, rather than Boot Camp, as an option for people who want to run Windows on their Macs.”
I played the Touche’ TV ad a few times and could not find a mention of Parallels anywhere.
It makes sense for Apple to promote Parallels as a “formal” solution now, since Boot Camp is beta. Apple has a history of supporting and promoting select Mac developer’s applications.
If there’s a support problem, Parallels has to deal with it. Not Apple. Boot Camp under OS X Leopard, obviously, would be different.
These Mac/PC TV commercials have been running quite awhile. Does that tell us that they’re working and Apple is beginning to sell more Macs to switchers?
We all don´t want to believe some guy at Apple do we? I only believe what the Steve says. And when Steves says it isn´t happening I will believe it; until then I have my fingers crossed.
I want to run Windows on my Mac!
I want to be cool with Windows on my Mac!
I can play more games with Windows on my Mac!
I can make both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates richer with Windows on my Mac!
I’m looking forward to Boot Camp working properly in 10.5. Right now the speakers aren’t even disabled when you plug in headphones, and sleep mode is pretty sketchy. Once the Windows drivers are solid, and especially if Mac OS X gets solid read/write to the WinNT partition, Boot Camp will be much nicer to use. It would be really cool if Apple made an HFS+ read/write utility and bundled it with Boot Camp’s drivers too – that way users could move documents between their Windows and Mac OS X partitions.
I am glad that this is apple’s response. I’d rather Apple spend their energies working on great Mac-only innovations. Spending their time chasing down windows incompatabilities would be too distracting.
I think the “productivity” loss associated with dual booting is overblown. Doesn’t anyone ever need a refreshed cup of coffee or a trip to the bathroom while the computer is accessing the different OS? Maybe speak to a co-worker in the next office/cubicle? Maybe, gasp!! stare into space for a minute?
I don’t dual boot using OS X/Doze, but I frequently access 10.3 on a external firewire drive using system preferences, which is itself dual booting. It takes at most 60 seconds total.
Here’s a question that may be slightly off topic: Why the fsck is Windows XP Pro so expensive? With the advent of Boot Camp and Parallels I was really hoping to replace all our old PC’s with Macs this summer but a copy of XP Pro is $310 and a user license (just the friggin license) is $270! WHY? We have a very small office but if I put Macs on every desk we’d have $1,120 in Windows XP alone, that’s the price of another machine! I find it amazing that Apple can sell OS X for $129 ($99 if you look hard enough) yet Microsoft sells a 5 year old operating system that isn’t even a shadow of OS X for $310. What a world. I’m in the wrong business.
Apple likely has some agreement with M$ that prohibits them to compete directly with Virtual PC (virtualization).
Jay,
It’s not merely the time to shutdown/restart; as the article notes you have to close down all programs and documents. Unlike Mail.app, Outlook doesn’t remember which emails you had open when you quit it. Unlike the Mac, Windows doesn’t remember which folders you have open.
Now, if you’re just booting Windows for games this isn’t an issue (besides the point that Parallels can’t virtualize 3D cards anyway); but if you just need a quick poke into a Windows-only app, a full reboot is wasteful. It’s like the original Mac’s Finder, you had to quit the program you were in to open another one.
I don’t know if you can just put Windows into Hibernate mode using Boot Camp; can anyone shed light on this?
Two things…
1. This is third-party information.
2. Keyword–“We.” Yeah, “We will not include virtulization,” could at some point in the future, translate into, “We didn’t want to do this ourselves. That’s why we are including Parallels as part of the OS.”
Why would Apple do all the work – and then have to support the result – when Parallels has done it and will support it?
Also, PS didn’t say there wouldn’t be code in Leopard that supports either Dual Boot or Virtualization, just that it would not include “a virtualization solution” in Leopard. They have no plans to compete with Parallels (or VMWare) at this time. And, as someone mentioned, there are still a few things in Boot Camp that need fixing.
Right now, Apple can claim that “Macs can run Windows” and most folk will ignore the perfectionists’ response … “badly”. By the time Vista comes along … or whatever is next from MS … that addendum cannot be there. Macs have to run Windows as well as a PC costing half as much does. And if you need to buy third party software to do that … that’s OK, too.
It would be sweet if we could include Linux, FreeBSD and Solaris in the mix – very sweet. Then it wouldn’t be “Apple caves in and runs Windows” so much as “Macs can do ANYTHING“.
Can somebody please define the following terms in computer-lingo speak…because I haven’t a clue.
What the heck is the difference between:
1. emulation
2. virtualization
3. (enter term here)…whatever WINE does
???
Please and thanks!