“Forget Boot Camp. Booting Windows on Apple hardware is an interesting sleight of hand, but this is different. What CodeWeavers is offering is the ability to actually run Windows applications from within Mac OS X. CodeWeavers’ commercial product, CrossOver Office, is based on the open-source Wine project — technology that has made it possible to run many Windows applications on Linux systems for almost ten years. By early next month, it will do the same for Mac OS X with CrossOver Mac,” Neil McAllister writes for Computerworld.
“Earlier Macs could run Windows software only with the help of Virtual PC, a Microsoft product that completely emulates the x86 platform environment on Apple’s PowerPC hardware. Wine works differently. Because it runs on Intel hardware it doesn’t have to virtualise the environment the way Virtual PC does — which means it doesn’t have Virtual PC’s overhead. Instead, Wine merely offers a custom implementation of the Windows APIs that translate Windows system calls into native ones. From the application’s point of view, Wine makes the underlying OS look like Windows,” McAllister writes.
“This is an incredible piece of engineering, representing years of hard work on the part of the Wine developers. And, believe me, there’s no love lost between Microsoft and the Wine project. Microsoft no more wants Wine to work on the Mac OS than it wanted it to work on Linux,” McAllister writes. “That’s the real shame of it. Although it’s great that Mac owners will soon be able to work with Microsoft Access databases and lay plans with Microsoft Project without having to install a full-blown copy of Windows, I can’t imagine a worse scenario than having to use a translation layer to run Microsoft’s proprietary software on Apple’s proprietary OS. CrossOver Office outperforms Virtual PC and allows users to forego the cost of a Windows licence. In other respects, however, it’s a step down, if you look at it from an open source perspective.”
Full article here.
Related articles:
CrossOver Mac allows Mac users to run Windows apps without Microsoft Windows – July 03, 2006
NeoOffice 2.0 Alpha 4 for Mac OS X released – July 01, 2006
Running Windows programs on Apple Mac without Windows – June 30, 2006
Patent hints Apple may incorporate Intel’s ‘unified desktop interface’ in Mac OS X Leopard – June 22, 2006
RUMOR: Apple Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard to ship January 2007 and feature collaborative documents – June 08, 2006
RUMOR: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard to feature virtualization, ‘living interface elements’ and more – May 30, 2006
Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard to feature ‘resolution independence?’ – May 21, 2006
Mac OS X Leopard to give Apple huge head-start on hypervised OS? – May 18, 2006
Apple ready to take back market share; may debut Windows virtualization in Mac OS X Leopard – April 21, 2006
Apple’s Boot Camp is first step towards Mac OS X Leopard’s inevitable support for virtualization – April 11, 2006
Dude, you got a Dell? What are you, stupid? Only Apple Macs run both Mac OS X and Windows! – April 05, 2006
RUMOR: Apple’s Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard to include VMWare-like ‘Chameleon’ virtualization software – March 24, 2006
Will future Intel-based Apple Macs offer multiple OS worlds via virtualization? – November 16, 2005
Mac OS X Leopard to contain ‘Red Box’ for natively running Windows applications? – June 23, 2005
Intel’s built-in virtualization tech could be one way to run Windows on Intel-based Apple Macs – June 16, 2005
Why buy a Dell when Apple’s Intel-based computers will run both Mac OS X and Windows? – June 08, 2005
Hmm… the thought of running Windows apps without seemingly having some sort of “protection layer” makes me nervous. I wonder how the performance compares to running apps in Parallels?
If you’re forced to run a Windows app or two, this could be a great solution. You wouldn’t have to pollute your Mac by installing Windows!
IF it really works as advertised, of course.
What about windows’ viruses? Would they run as well?
Will this suddenly make OS X vulnerable to Windows malware and viruses?
The rapid development of software which enables the seamless running of Windows programmes on OS X is quite amazing.
But running Windows’ programmes on OS X without Windows – if it proves to be stable – is going to be a great blow to MS.
More and more nails are being hammered into MS’s coffin with heart-warming regularity
I’d love to see AutoCAD added to the list of compatible programs…
Well if they had a proof of concept, maybe I wouldn’t have purchased Parallels a couple days ago.
S
This is not necessarily a good thing. If Wine really takes off, then why would 3rd party developers ever develop a Mac-specific version of their software? And that’s bad bad bad for OS X. Because, really, how much do you actually do with the OS beyond running applications? And if all of the applications are really just Windows apps, then the argument is “you can run apps on their native OS, or you can run apps on a non-native OS”. Most people will pick the native OS.
“I’d love to see AutoCAD added to the list of compatible programs…”
I know, I have been wanting to run Autocad nativley on my mac since I switched 4 years ago. I have a buisness I started athat relies on Autocad 100%. It is the only reason I run windows. I do it now on my PC laptop. It is about dead though so I am looking to get something new and I want to wait for all this to pan out before getting a new apple.
CrossOver Office worked really great on Linux when I used it (3 years ago). Unsupported apps are problematical. Wine translates Windows API calls into their analog in the host OS. Each application seems to implement these system calls differently, and so CXO has to tweak the application so that it runs properly. The supported applications have been tweaked to ensure smooth operation. Unsupported apps may work or not depending on how closely they conform to the published Windows API.
I was able to run Linux and run all the business-critical Windows apps I needed in a Windows-only environment using CXO, it’s a great product.
If you want to run AutoCad, get Parallels – that is one program I didn’t have much luck with on Linux/CXO.
The list of Windows apps I would potentially run on my Macs:
AutoCad
GPS Mapping/Navigation (Delorme & Garmin)
MS Project
MiniTab
Of the above, only Project is a CXO supported application. So for me, the choice would be Parallels.
Yes…I am so there having AutoCAD Architectural Desktop 2007 or even Revit running on OSX. It would be fun to use a high powered drafting program on the Mac again. After doing some drafting by hand (way back in the late 80’s), was able to use Versa Cad on Mac OS. Eventually upgraded to Microstation on Mac OS. Sadly Microstation did not continue their product support and allowed the program to die. Currently using AutoCAD Architectural Desktop 2007 on WinXP. It would be nice to have a choice again.
Not a good idea?????
You’re right, it’s an AWESOME IDEA.
Could this help Mac gaming?
They’re supposed to be working on Half Life 2 to run in this WINE-like layer.
I wonder if it would be cheaper for games developers to licence the technology from CodeWeavers, rather than do a port to the Mac?
I’m sure games wouldn’t cost any more this way, the licence from CodeWeavers being offset by the shorter development time.
Don’t forget, this effectively runs under X11, so although being fine for the odd app and games, I don’t think we’ll see Adobe abandoning the Mac any time soon.
People who worry that things like this might mean that developers won’t make Mac OS X-specific versions of their applications don’t understand what makes Mac OS X unique or why developers write for Mac OS X or, for that matter, why people choose Mac OS X.
and why would anyone still spend months on developing a Mac version of anything, if they already have an x86 version? Why would Adobe need to produce a Mac Creative Suite?
Even though it opens the door for many Apps to run on the Mac, many companies will not bother with Mac-specific development.
Where I work, DarWINE has already been tested with Photoshop, WinMediaPlayer and a host of other apps. That is “CrossOver” without the GUI install, etc.
It works.
I think this explains why Gates only committed to Office for the next 5 years. After that – there won’t be a need for a dedicated Mac version. Actually, after THIS there won’t be a reason for a dedicated version.
For those who are wondering if this will open OS X up to Windows malware, the answer is “no”.
Then there’s all that other stuff that targets MS Office, IE, Entourage, etc. The answer there is less happy-making. If you use an app that supports VB or ActiveX or ASP then you are open to malware that targets vulnerabilities in these technologies. OS X may shield you from some of these problems, but you can’t count on it. If you plan to run MS software, put an AV program on your Mac first.
Fred, I think you are being too optimistic. Currently, Adobe produces their creative suite (Dreamweaver, Flash, etc) for both platforms. I just can’t see them swooning over the great things about OS X if it means they have to produce a whole different version–especially if their Windows version will run just fine. If there’s no economic incentive to do it, then they won’t do it.
For those Autocad users you can use either VectorWorks or better yet use Archicad it is easier than Revit and better than either AutoCAD or ADT and yes I have been an AUtoCAD user since R11 and dropped it without any problems.
“In other respects, however, [Cross Over Office] is a step down, if you look at it from an open source perspective.”
It’s a step down for more reasons than that; namely you are using M$ shit.
For those needing a robust project management tool on Mac OS X:
1. Merlin: http://www.projectwizards.net/en/merlin2/features
2. OmniPlan: http://www.omnigroup.com/omniplan/
Support these great Mac developers, the hell with MafiaSoft
This program really isn’t that good. It says it will only run 52 programs so it’s not really the perfect solution. But it is pretty cool.
dpp:
National Geograpic makes mapping/GPS software for OS X. My buddy runs an outdoor store and stopped carrying DeLorme until they release a Mac version!
re: dpp
Garmin says it will have its GPS software for OS-X out this year – they were at Macworld this past year.
Adobe gets 50% of their profits from Mac users. Do you really think they would throw that away and force dedicated Mac power users to settle for the Windows version in emulation?
HELLO! Anybody home McFly?