MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

This is like saying if diesel cars could use petrol.

I have heard Darwine working with simple exe's like minesweeper. But I think using it on something more advanced that contains registry entries is going to take a lot more development, probably never going to happen.

Everybody is missing the point, 90% of the reason of buying a mac is for the superior operating system, sure even with windows youd have a well made and pretty computer but OSX is the main reason. God this irritates me to hear lol

I gotta agree with MDN on this. Running Windows apps at native speed without windows on a Mac would remove possibly the biggest obstacle to someone switching.
At the very least it would signifigantly erode Microshaft's strangle-hold on the world. Imagine a world were we didn't need Office for the Mac we could just use Office.

So if the company can just program for Windows and not for the Mac, then companies have no need to stick with the Mac. OS2 did this with Windows apps before and well, OS2 is pretty much dead, and Windows took over. Live and learn, not just say it would be great, because the Mac would then get left out of development, and Windows would be the only thing people programmed for, then complain to Apple if a program didn't work. Apple is not going to do this, so get over it.

You would also see many developers drop native OS X support and develop only in the Windows environment, then OS X users would be stuck using crappy, frankinstien looking apps. It would be bad.

Personally I think apple's best tool into getting people to switch is to get them in other areas - the iPod, the iPod hi-fi, a media center, home server solution. Once you get them with one of them you reel them in and plop them into the Mac net.

Of course students would say this. Most students have a collection of unpaid-for software running on their Windows PCs. It doesn't follow that the rest of the world would follow suit.

Apple's market share will rise to 9% on it's own merits. It was already climbing before the Intel move.

It would have to exclude any Windows source code for both legal and security reasons. If Apple could pull of an emulation layer, that would be seamless AND use the Mac interface elements, it would be huge.

I think this is the real reason Apple switched to Intel. It worked once weening people from OS9 to OSX (Classic) why couldn't it work again.

I work in the architecture and real estate fields. I'm now letting others do the design work since my windows computer crapped out on my (only 2 years old). The MLS our region uses requires windows & IE only --- can't even use firefox on windows to gain access. I have to use a program called Citrix on my iMac to get into the MLS.

I've talked to the folks that do the MLS system and they say not enough real estate agents have Macs to make it worth the effort to make it Mac compatible. Of course, until the MLS is Mac compatible the number of agents using Macs will not increase.

I know a good 20 people that would LOVE to buy a Mac but due to AutoCAD and MLS they are stuck in the windows world.

MDN's regurgitated take relies upon the rest of the world being AWARE of OS X, which unfortunately is the biggest obstacle.

Nine percent seems optimistic, but hey, I'd love to see it happen. I too have Windows friends who are finally ready to switch because they'll keep their "safety net".

An under-the-hood Windows application translator, operating not unlike Rosetta, regardless who creates it, would make Microsoft and their crapware vanish faster than dragging an icon off of your Dock.

There are a couple of interesting and opposing points brought up above. The first is the OS/2 effect where the developer asks themelves why write for OSX when I can write for Windows and get the Mac users anyway. The second is opening the market to those that require one or two specialzed applications that are Windows only.

I don't think Darwine is the solution. I have no problem with the idea of having MS Windows on my Mac, so long as I still have my OSX when I want it.

I am a recent switcher. Was Mac from 1984, stopped somewhere in the 90's and came back a few months ago. If someone was able to get XP to run on a Mac, I'd go out and get a new MacBook Pro the next day. There are still a couple of apps that I use on the PC side, and they're not games.

The best solution might be one where the user had to dual boot to get XP. This way, they'd be more enclined to want an application that was native OSX rather than switching to XP to use an app that was dual platform.

iSteve,

Having the same problem with MLS in arizona. What does Citrix do to help you gain access and where do I get it?

iSteve

I understand where you are coming from. I had friend pretty much converted and then he found out the MLS site only works with IE for Windows and he had to buy a crappy Dell notebook instead. Sad indeed. I contacted the developer and they pretty much told me that they had no plans of supporting the mac.

I had a Dell notebook and it was the biggest POS I've had. It can't even be compared to my iBook.

- The keyboard broke. One of the keys just popped.
- The DVD drive would make a noise that you'd hear through the headphones
- The pointing device (joystick) would often get stuck and would move the cursor off the screen
- The power management features didn't work well. When I closed it and opened it again it would sometimes crash.

I do believe that supporting Windows in a mac would make sense for biz that must run certain win only apps. I also agree that if macs do this then developers may no longer have an incentive to develop software for OSX.

I'm wondering if it may make sense for Apple to offer Win support only to biz. As long as MS Office for the Mac is around the average consumer doesn't need Windows.

Good Morning fellow Macdudes,

From reading the article this morning it would be great if apple computer got mac os x to work with windows apps instead of resorting of Virtual PC which is supplied by u know who, (Darth Vader himself/Yoda).

But as i was cruising on the net at 8 billion miles an hour on my new intel core duo (recently changed from windblows and the dark side), I came upon this piece of software called iEmulator. It does what we all want to do which is run windows apps on the mac platform. The only bad thing about it right now is that it don't run on intel macs. But according to the email that they sent me it will be able to run by the end of March or April. Otherwise we can always resort back to Virtual PC with Yoda (Bill Gates) and his little Ewoks but who would want to do that since it won't be released for another year of so. We can wait and pay the steep price that comes with it or try iEmulator while apple computer irons out the code a bit more to make it possible. Oh and i did i mention iEmulator is free or will be free when released for the intel mac.

Here's the link to iEmulator:

http://www.iemulator.com/

Enjoy ladies and gentlemen.

It sounds like a lot people seem to think that this is just something Apple can just switch on to enable, I don't think it is technically possible to run complex apps that require windows registry entries, dll's etc to run.

Most windows apps are a mess, files installed all over the place, registry, system directories. It;s not like most Linux/Mac apps that are contained within a folder.

Instead of supporting Windows apps directly, Apple should team with Intel to develop a means of rapidly converting Windows apps to "Universal Binaries" that will run either in OS X or Windows. That would significantly lower the threshold for developers to port their software to OS X and would avoid the potential problem of having them drop support for OS X.

I am not a developer, but if the underlying hardware is the same, porting to OS X should be much easier... or not?

Ahhh the debate rages on.

Darwine is a neat idea but pretty far away currently.

The real Windows OS running in a protected mode under OS-X is much more reasonable. Recent experiments have shown a 600 to 800 percent increase in performance compared to Virtual PC, approximately 95% efficient compared to a PC laptop running Windows directly. That's way more than adequate to do Office productivity things and a lot better than the performance of Rosetta translating PowerPC code.

Apple can not officially get behind the movement to get Windows going on the Mac due to their thin and fragile relationship with Microsoft and the curent need for a Mac version of Office (not to mention the support headaches from all the inherent Windows problems and issues).

Some developer somewhere is going to make a lot of money when they offer a packaged solution that works and allows MS-OS and apps to run at near native PC speed on a Mac (Semi-Virtual PC?).

This is not an issue of who's OS is better, it's purely a business thing. Apple WILL sell more machines when folks can run some Windows crap on their superlative Apple hardware. They'd rather have the Apple but they're tied to some PC only feature or software set.

Don't even raise the argument of alternatives on the Mac. For some things there just are no alternatives, for instance, as a service technician try to connect your Mac laptop directly to a satellite phone headend on a cruise ship. My largest client has over 40 PC laptops on their ship that can do it but my Mac can't (damn). The satellite service provider just laughs and says NO when you ask about Mac support.

I have several clients who salivate wildly when they see how nice my Powerbook is but their corporate IT systems have some Windows requirements. My brother teaches at a University that is Windows only, trying to promote the Mac there is like one man trying to drink the ocean.

If these folks could have an Apple computer that would allow them to run their Windows-only apps equivalent to their Windows laptop hardware they would buy the Apple.

We own 3 Macs and 3 PCs. There are still some Windows programs that I need that are not available on Mac. If Macs ran both OS X and Windows, I would get rid of the PCs instantly as would many other people I know.

The best way to convert a Windows user is to be a Mac enthusiast, not a Windows hater.

"The best way to convert a Windows user is to be a Mac enthusiast, not a Windows hater."

Amen to that. Too many people just want to get into this rabid debate with their PC using buddies in order to somehow prop their self esteem about their platform choice.

The best way to convince people is to show them, not try and beat them over the head with it.

For all those who say it cannot be done, this technology already exists for linux in the form of wine and the more refined crossover office, so it obviously possible. Plus there's alot more bucks in it for developers on the mac since mac users pay for their software. This makes it even more probable. If people can get photoshop running in Darwine, as they have, then they could get most apps running I would think.
Apple should go for it!
I think they are going to, just adopting the steady as she goes approach at the moment. Getting the major companies to create dual binaries of mac apps first making it unlikely they would dump their mac products in the future if osx were able to run win exe's.

"It’s possible, but not very likely. Mac users are Mac users because they want to run software in the Mac interface.

That's a pretty weak argument, there is a lot of things we want to do but are forced to comply with a given standard.

Being able to install Windows Vista on a Mac will make it all so much easier.

Also the argument assumes that Windows will always be a POS insecure OS that it is now and Mac OS X will always be extremely better.

Microsoft may be behind Apple, but they don't stay there long enough to give Apple any chance to make significant gains in market share.

And I'd buy a Hyundai if it ran like a BMW. Would you date X is she looked like Y? I'm so tired by surveys of this kind. They mean nothing.

The facts are that the world is populated by people who many times do very stupid things that are not in their best interest. They also tend to be easily swayed by the bandwagon effect. This explains the popularity of American Idol, People Magazine, MTV, Hip-Hop, Tattoos and other blights upon our society.

Americans, in particular, have shown time and again that they are cheap, unless there is some compelling reason not to be. They are also easily affected by advertising, word of mouth and what is supposed to be trendy. I really could care less if these mindless drones ever buy anything made by Apple. These lemmings and Microsoft deserve each other.

I'd date your fat sister if she looked like Tyra banks.

Get the idea

the inherent security of OSX, the quality of Apple hardware, and the joy of the iApps are some of the driving factors for using the Mac. Is there really a reason to have applications written for Mac only? What OS specific applications does do is lock people into a OS. Windows folks hesitate to move to Apple and visa-versa due to the expense of buying software; which is more expensive than the hardware.
Universal standard software that would work on both is an issue because many would not follow the standard and instead write only for Windows. (see the Internet)

Personally, right now, Apple can't supply enough hardware anyway so I think this argument is mute. And to open up the Mac to Windows is a very risky proposition with possible unforeseen consquences.
Apple is doing just fine right now. However, the migration to Intel appears to give Apple the option of opening things up.

Another question is Would Apple be better off financially if they allowed Windows to run on Macs or buy allowing OSX to run on PCs? Hmmm?

For purely personal reasons, if I could get a Macbook Pro to run the only industry standard Windows app I need for my consulting business, without the Windows OS, I would be happier than a pig in shit.

I don't think it will happen, but one can only hope.

GIVE . . . ME . . . MY . . . PIE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The article and MDN's comments are spot on. That is why I am an investor for the long haul. Add in Intel's reported coming hardware supported virtualization, and I will be running both OS X and Linux at the same time -- I detest Windows too much to put it on any computer.

I will be buying my wife an Intel based low end MacBook soon and I am looking forward to a high end Intel based virtualization supported Mac for myself. That just blows away dual booting or any emulation scheme. I started on the Mac back in the 1980's and will be glad to get back.

Those who are primarily Mac developers would continue to develop their Mac software, but the big developers who make versions of their software for multiple operating systems would indeed stop writing an OS X version.

My 2 cents.

I'll buy 5 Mac minis if it can run Windows.

What's needed here is both a strategic and a tactical view.

The received wisdom would state that it would be a strategic mistake to alienate MSFT by providing an OS-level emulator – which could be recognised by people with any form of memory as Rhapsody's Red Box – as this would effectively deny MSFT the sales of VirtualPC, but may - depending on the actual tactic used (emulating Windows instructions and APIs vs. the creation of a protected virtual x86 processor running "in a box") also deny MSFT the sale of a copy of Windows XP or Vista.

In the medium-term - which I would define as three years – Apple needs MSFT to continue producing versions of Office that embrace the latest in Mac OS technologies, such as Powerpoint's support of alpha-channel transparency. However the MacBU at MSFT has, under the stewardship of Ms. Ho, been regressing into a NIH ("Not invented here") mindset which means that there is no direct support for Apple's Address Book, iCal, or iSync technology, much less support for Apple's own Dictionary or Thesaurus.

Given that Pages is probably only 2-3 years from having the same level of functionality as Word (I'd argue that Keynote is already so far from Powerpoint that it could practically stop, tie its shoelaces, have a Frappuccino, read the Lord of the Rings trilogy, then watch the DVDs with all the extras and still be in front from a functionality and quality point of view), there will ultimately come a point where, with the addition of a decent spreadsheet, Apple's reliance on MSFT will come to a grinding halt, especially if MSFT adopt a transparent document format based on XML.

Personally, I think Apple should do both an x86 "Red Box" (potentially by adopting and extending the Xen product or somesuch) and an "Orange Box" (or whatever colour you want) using Transitive's technology to map simple Windows APIs onto the the Mac.

Have a simple Windows app (something you knocked up in VB) that doesn't do much interaction with other Windows technologies, use Orange Box - on the strict understanding that you'll get none of the elegance of MacOS and all of the underlying technologies.

Have a more complicated app that demands direct interaction with Windows components, use a "proper" (?) implementation of Windows under Red Box.

If MSFT throws its corporate rattle out of the pram because of Orange Box and cancels Office:mac, it won't matter in the medium-term because Red Box will allow Office:vista to run in a box, and - in the long-term - it won't matter because iWork Pro (potentially incorporating Mariner Calc, or - God willing - a resurrected version of Lotus Improv) will be more respectful of Mac OS technologies and be capable of reading/writing Office files.

MSFT only has itself to blame if this comes to pass: a reducing commitment to the Mac (as if it wasn't half-hearted in the first place) means that the platform has no commitment to MSFT development tools (no VB, no Visual Studio), no real commitment to Exchange (expensive, over-engineered - personally, I'd rather commit to Kerio until Apple delivers a real mail/groupware server which is rumored for Leopard Server anyway), and no commitment to tools like Visio (try Graffle instead), Project (try Merlin - it's actually nicer), Sharepoint or the like.

Cubert>

Yeah, Adobe will stop writing CS for the Mac.

Except there would be no support for Apple's ColorSync under a Window version.

Who else - as a large developer - are we talking about?

MSFT? Already so far removed from Apple's OS technologies that I'm not sure I care. I stopped using Powerpoint the day Keynote came out. And I've now even stopped using Word to originate new documents, because Pages does everything I want, with the exception of mail merge, in a more intuitive manner.

All I need now is a spreadsheet.

SO THAT MEANS APPLE CAN A L S O R U NS windoze's VISTA (ViruseS, InfectionS, SpywareS, TrojanS & AdsS)?



NNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

hey, waiting for shorthorn: nice way to screw up the page width for those of us without a HUGE monitor...

I really wish people wouldn't do that....