MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Take that MacroSloth

my Mac rules U

meaning viruses will go universal...

And when that does happen..... developers will want to write native Mac software because...... ??


Don't mind the switch to Intel, but it cuts both ways...

Where is the MDN take about not needing to run Micosoft garbage on a Mac? Oh wait, it is a feature in an Apple developed product so MDN makes no lame anti-MS dig because it would expose them as the idiots they are.

I cringe at the thought of looking at a windoze app but at least I won't have to look at the Blue Screen of Death.

Nov 30, 07 - 02:11 pm Comment from: amyhre

Making using multiple operating systems on your Mac much less of a hassle and less costly to boot.

Nov 30, 07 - 02:11 pm Comment from: ChrissyOne

I've said from the beginning that this is coming. It will be a very good thing. Really.

@No MDN Take?

"Embrace and extinguish."

Does MDN really need to restate it in response to a nebulous rumor?

@jltnol

Yes... more evidence that the sky is falling! Run for your life!

Nov 30, 07 - 02:17 pm Comment from: shen

but the real question...

will they still look like the ungodly garbage that is the excuse for appearance on the windows desktop?

@ No MDN Take?

Thank you...I totally agree. It's nice to see others that feel the same way about how MDN has to put their two cents in as if I want or need it.

unfortunately this is something I need as some apps were never made for windows.
Autocad - Revit...3D studio Max.
In my opinion these are the best apps in the business and if you don't agree at least you know they are the standard. i NEED to run tehm on my Mac without the need to install c%^&y;Vista

woops i meant apps that were never made for Mac

@No MDN Take?

You must be new here.

MDN already said it all, repeatedly, long ago:

Apple introduces Boot Camp: public beta software enables Intel-based Macs to run Windows XP - April 05, 2006
Dude, you got a Dell? What are you, stupid? Only Apple Macs run both Mac OS X and Windows! - April 05, 2006
Intel-based Macs running both Mac OS X and Windows will be good for Apple - June 10, 2005

Nov 30, 07 - 02:28 pm Comment from: Winston

Maybe this'll appear in OS X Lion: the king of the jungle.

Nov 30, 07 - 02:33 pm Comment from: ABQ Peter

short term perhaps some slowdown in mac apps, but longer term this kills windows.

Nov 30, 07 - 02:34 pm Comment from: HotinPlaya

It sounds good, but I am afraid we would see a big damper on future OS X application development

Credible sources have reported in the past that they have seen technology demonstrations of OSX running Windows applications. What makes this possible is the fact that Apple has the right to use the XP APIs under a cross-licensing agreement between Apple and Microsoft that dates from Steve's return to Apple. For a company that has made Classic run under OSX, and has created Rosetta -- a near miracle -- putting XP API's in an OSX layer would not be difficult. The real question is why? I really don't see Apple making this a public feature, but Steve has surprised us before.

Nov 30, 07 - 02:40 pm Comment from: TowerTone

This may be a device ready to be used when/if the market share has tilted enough for the Mac that the FINAL blow will be that you can bring your legacy Windows apps with you.

I can't see them opening this up until Apple gets upward of 20% of the market, ensuring OS X developers a sustainable model.

Why would I want to run Win apps on my Mac?

Port or Rewrite.

Nov 30, 07 - 02:43 pm Comment from: CandTsmac

@ right on.

Don;t want. Go elsewhere. Just stop complaining about the site and maybe you might have something to say about the topic.

What happened today, no school for you?

Nov 30, 07 - 02:44 pm Comment from: Long duc Dong

Sounds like Leopard may start chewing the fat out of the FAT32 before we know it.

If I have the option to run both Mac and Windows apps simultaneously and seamlessly without Bootcamp or third party software, the better for me. Not every Windows app is wholly worthless.

Nov 30, 07 - 03:01 pm Comment from: Metryq

Headline News: Today several office chairs were orbited from Redmond...

I doubt this would happen. Windows isn't the only platform to use the PE binary format. Odds are, this was inherited with the FreeBSD code that Apple is basing darwin on. Since both FreeBSD and NetBSD have compat options for pe binaries. Bootcamp/virtualization are probably as close to windows apps running on macs as Apple wants to officially support.

Nov 30, 07 - 03:03 pm Comment from: Mr. Reeee

Hey folks, it's possible NOW with some Windoze apps. It's called CrossOver.

http://www.codeweavers.com/

A fast one, the winner, a “Steven” posted the following on January 27, 6:31 PM :

“Apple will resurrect the Yellow Box for Windows allowing Mac apps compiled in Xcode to be run on Windows machines.”

http://applerecon.com/2007/01/29/contest-1-winner/

http://applerecon.com/2007/01/29/mac-apps-on-windows/

Nov 30, 07 - 03:15 pm Comment from: Ferf Muckmeyer

Keep the Windows apps where they belong - in Windows. Yeah, Crossover and other products are out there but is this really viable? What about cross-platform issues like networking, printing, etc? And what about viruses and other malware that can impact specific Windows apps?

I'll stick with Boot Camp and/or Parallels.

But then why would greedy execs authorize development for OS X, when they could target windows only and it will work on both?

Nov 30, 07 - 03:23 pm Comment from: theDoctor

I agree with Ferf, to truly be able to run winblows DLL's with wide compatibility, Apple will have to add more winblows like infrastructure in the Apple Kernel. This will make malware for winblows much more dangerous to OS X.

Is this worth it?

"And when that does happen..... developers will want to write native Mac software because...... ??"

Because writing software for the Mac is more satisfying, more powerful, and easier. When Windows was first released with the ability run DOS apps, developers recognized the power of Windows and dumped DOS. The same would happen in this situation.

which is the better option? parallels, VMfusion, or crossover?

Nov 30, 07 - 03:33 pm Comment from: Macintosh

It would be great long term. It will eliminate the need for Microsoft Windows. It will ease the transition to Mac even further, and get more people using the Mac OS, which is the real point. As soon as that takes off and all the WIndows apps are running on a separate layer - but on Mac OS, not Windows, developers will eventually start just writing them for Mac.

Nov 30, 07 - 03:44 pm Comment from: NeonRed

A better Vista than Vista™!!? Who knew? And when did they know it? M$ must be on the 5 year plan... now they have an abundance of left shoes and none for the other foot. lol The proletariat should be proud!

Technically: extremely difficult; business advantage: questionable; security: risky. Very unlikely in my opinion.

Nov 30, 07 - 03:50 pm Comment from: shiftOpt k

I hope this, if anything comes of it, will be something you can choose to 'opt out' of. B/c I agree with iMat. This could be the beginning of the end of the no viruses in the wild for Mac users. Plus, the whole question of why would developers continue to create and maintain Mac only apps.

MS: Your life, as you knew it, is over.

Nov 30, 07 - 03:53 pm Comment from: The Macolyte

If you all think it's nebulous, then start looking carefully at the code and what's buried deep within.

Embrace and extinguish ?

Ignore and extinguish !

Nov 30, 07 - 04:01 pm Comment from: NCIceman

Do not fear any running of Windows apps on th mac as the death of Mac development. Once people experience the superior environment, they will want native applications that can take full advantage of it.

Windows on Mac -> greater mac sales -> more native mac apps

OS/2 anyone?

Nov 30, 07 - 04:43 pm Comment from: Gandalf

Why would I want to run Win apps on my Mac?

Port or Rewrite.

Some people do need Windows apps, that is a given. There is one great reason for running Windows apps natively, no Microsoft Tax. Currently with Boot Camp, Parallels etc you can run Windows apps on Macs anyway but you still have to buy Windows.

This cross platform app ability has long been desired by many, the hardware makers and consumers. Apple, IBM, Sun have tried with OpenDoc, Java, etc, they have been stymied by Microsoft mostly, and perhaps Adobe, the most profitable software only companies.

Credible sources have reported in the past that they have seen technology demonstrations of OSX running Windows applications. What makes this possible is the fact that Apple has the right to use the XP APIs under a cross-licensing agreement between Apple and Microsoft that dates from Steve's return to Apple. For a company that has made Classic run under OSX, and has created Rosetta -- a near miracle -- putting XP API's in an OSX layer would not be difficult. The real question is why? I really don't see Apple making this a public feature, but Steve has surprised us before.

Spot on, Apple has the rights to XP APIs. Again we are seeing an oblique shot at Microsoft, Apple can argue that it only caters for the XP users that don't upgrade (sic) to Vista so is no threat to the serious Windows market.

Windows developers are stuck in the Vista quagmire now and have been for a year or more, maybe they will consider alternatives. Furthermore Apple has released updated developer tools that they seem to believe are far superior, I trust Apple more than Microsoft when they make such comments. Same app on Leopard and XP, which is the better user experience? Some developers want to provide better user experience, apps will run twice as fast on Leopard as on Vista. Will enough developers switch? - that is the gamble but as they say timing is everything.

Remember many of those Windows boxes sold never have any apps bought for them anyway, they end up as dull terminals (start off that way too!). Windows users buy fewer apps than Mac users, shareware Mac developers have become millionaires. It is not a 90:10 split for developers, never was, as the balance shifts towards Mac more developers will too.

I always thought more interoperability from Apple (such as licensing OS X) wouldn't occur until they got 15% marketshare (or at minimum 10%) to provide the cushion for the few years they have to uphold whatever contracts would be signed should things not work out. Apple is well on their way to 10% but a further cushion has been added by the iPod/iPhone products. The cushion now is such that Apple could mess most everything Mac up for several years to come and still have the ability to pull out of it.

I am really looking forward to the day when 'beleaguered Microsoft' is on the lips and in the headlines as a norm, that day seems to be getting closer.

Running Windows apps on OSX is not going to convert that many Windows users. They use windows because it comes with their stinky Dell or HP. If they wanted to run Mac Apps they would buy a Mac.

What it may do is remove some barriers in IT departments to allowing Macs.

Nov 30, 07 - 04:47 pm Comment from: Macromancer

"Oh wait, it is a feature in an Apple developed product so MDN makes no lame anti-MS dig because it would expose them as the idiots they are."

No, it's part of the business strategy that MDN has been touting as embrace and extinguish. You're short sighted and don't see the big picture.

It's not a feature intended to be used as a long term solution, but a means to give people the security blanket they need to make the switch.

Quit trying to make it seem like theres some sort of conspiracy here.

Nov 30, 07 - 04:53 pm Comment from: Gandalf

See this old Cringely article.

There May Be an End-run for Apple Around Windows After All

Maybe a leopard CAN change it's spots!

I could possibly see this being used to support running a select few, key Windows-only applications that prevent people from switching. Think AutoCAD, Access and Outlook.

From what I understand, though, trying to simulate the entire Windows platform so that you could run arbitrary out-of-the-box Windows software is simply not feasible. There are just too many "undocumented features," bugs, cruft, and interdependencies that even Microsoft themselves do not understand very well. (Their internal DLL dependencies chart alone brings the term "spaghetti code" to a new level of meaning)

Nov 30, 07 - 05:36 pm Comment from: Docbop

Sure it would be nice to run a few of the Windows app's that there are no Windows versions for Mac, but I see all the downside of Windows virus and memory leaks moving over too. So not sure how good of a thing this really is.

Nov 30, 07 - 07:12 pm Comment from: toby

Is this a good idea? Rebooting into Windows is one thing (and somethign I'm VERY interested...well not so much windows as having a Mac-Linux-Windows system in one computer), but to merge the environments....


Without some serious fire guards (most of which would be better served improving OS X security) this just seems plagued with problems for a mild increase in convenience.

I just hope this is one of those cray "not going to happen" rumors.

Nov 30, 07 - 08:30 pm Comment from: effwerd

This is for when Adobe abandons the Mac platform - probably in about two years.

Nov 30, 07 - 08:48 pm Comment from: MacMarc

Couldn't this just be part of Boot Camp????

Nov 30, 07 - 08:56 pm Comment from: Jubei

So you buy Mac hardware, run Mac OS which "natively" runs Windows applications, without the need to install Windows? The apps that you buy for Windows will look and behave just like a Mac program without a hit in performance?