MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Does the API include the "Blue Screen of Death" procedure? Is it multithreaded? Will it run of both processors?

Does the API include virus and trojan support? Will I be able to run all of the latest virus protection software applications?

Does it include the defragmentation tool that defrags most but not all of the disk?

This guy is too reasonable. Off with his head.

Dec 06, 07 - 12:33 am Comment from: Ferf Muckmeyer

This guy is probably right on after reading the whole article, which makes a lot of sense. Regardless, I'll repeat what I said earlier - why bother with this? Keep Windows apps in Windows, period. There are just too many potential headaches with this concept.

After dealing with both 10.4, 10.5 and both XP and Vista extensively for years (obviously vista and 10.5 being fairly recent) I have to say that even if Apple is using Windows API's within leopard I think that this is the wrong plant. Instead we need to develop competitive software similar to that of windows that can deal with popular file types, for example there is little to no justification for quicken for mac 2007 and quicken for windows 2007/2008 to not only use different file types, and be virtually impossible to interchange the types of files without going through rigorous constraints within the exporting of file-types, but also a huge feature gap.

This would in-turn lead to the statement of "oh, well intuit is just trying screw mac-users and we have other programs like iBank" but programs like iBank are also not up to snuff for even what I need, and I need nothing else than to keep track of personal finances, no investments, etc, in a reasonably clean gui, etc.

Long-story short, don't emulate windows, don't port windows, develop better software.

Dec 06, 07 - 01:12 am Comment from: The Other Steve

You think people went nuts with the new doc?
Implement this and Steve would need a body guard.

Of course It's not real.

SFMIP

Dec 06, 07 - 01:49 am Comment from: TheConfuzed1

There are those among us, that don't want Windows apps on their Macs. Those who do want, or need them, have viable options already, with solutions such as Parallels.

If it ain't broken, don't fix it.

Hey people!
I saw this and couldn't help but want to show you.
It's just a reminder that Apple has something Micros**t cannot buy:

http://www.thenest.com/articles/article_life.aspx?articleid=A71121132438

Will MACs get a gawd awful M$ registry too?

I love blue screens!

Man, and I thought MDN finally gave up on posting Roughly Drafted fanboy nonsense on this website.

Eran is an idiot on the level of Dvorak and Thurrot, he's just on the other side of the issue. Nothing he says should be given any weight. I'm surprised he can even type so much one-handed while he jerks off to videos of Apple and Steve Jobs.

Dec 06, 07 - 02:42 am Comment from: g_lined

Well said Anti-RD-Man! Whenever I realise I've been sent to RD, I sigh and brace mysefl. This time he wasn't too bad. I think he knows his stuff more than Dvorak though!

Dec 06, 07 - 02:53 am Comment from: shen

so on the one hand we have a full article that seems reasonable and well written, and on the other hand a poster calling himself "anti-rd-man" who talks about jerking off.

gosh, who to believe, who to believe......

Yea, Daniel's a fanboy. But if you read a lot of his articles, esp not ones talking about current events (like his OS wars series) he's really damn good at laying out that stuff.

He may ooze fanboy all throughout the text, but that doesn't keep him from being right 95% of the time.

And yea, thats a WAY higher percentage than Dvorak.

I hate his opinions almost as much as that keyboard layout.

"he's really damn good at laying out that stuff. "

Except that most of his stuff makes absolutely no sense. Good Layout, Bad Content.

God I hate flatulent mindless Microsoft trolls, because here we go again with them on MDN trying to put Dilger down..

Well guys, let me tell you, he has a big following, because he talks sense, argues with facts - not spin or FUD - and is right 99% of the time. And he's prepared to admit when he is shown to be wrong.

Compare that to the Microsoft spin and FUD machine.

Oh, and if you want to see how backward Microsft is just read their page on BIOS versus EFI - it just beggars belief:

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/firmware/efibrief.mspx

You have to laugh...

Dec 06, 07 - 09:01 am Comment from: British Mac Head

Hey Dilger is not a fanboy.
Here's an excerpt from Wikipedia defining a fanboy:

"They will readily engage in debates, but will fall back on emotional responses when challenged on facts. For example, a fanboy may go out of his way to point out negative and often untrue statements about their obsession's rivals"

Dilger uses research and cold hard facts when challenging people who spout FUD. Surely the people who he challenges (Thurrott, Dvorak etc) are the fanboys for just posting up opinion pieces full of bullsh*t.

So who are the real fanboys I wonder?

PMSL

@Anti-RD-Man

I don't dispute most of what you said about DED: it was both true and funny.

But you also got it right when you characterized him as a "fanboy". Now no-one could call Thurrott or Dvorak "Microsoft fanboys". Dvorak baits Apple fans for hits (but has publicly admitted that OS X comprehensively spanks Vista). And Thurrott knows that if he told the truth about Microsoft products his privileged access to people inside the company would dry up, so that his columns would be of less interest to Windows users and he'd suffer financially.

In short, they're not fanboys. They don't actually love Windows. I don't think anyone does -- not even its mother.

Dilger, Dvorak, and Thurrott are all untrustworthy sources, but all for *different* reasons.

Dec 06, 07 - 09:16 am Comment from: British Mac Head

So are you implying that Dilger resorts to lies and emotional responses within his arguments? I've never seen it personally! I wouldn't read his articles if he did. He would have to resort to lies and emotional responses to earn the title "fanboy". It is exactly the reason why Thurrott is a Windows Fanboy as he intentionally avoids the truth about Microsoft products to keep his access to M$ staff open. You could also call him a Microsoft Shill.

And give yourself a name so we can reference you please mate. @Anti-RD-Man shouldn't go in your "comment from:" box. Just put it in the body. In fact why don't you register while you're at it?

Dec 06, 07 - 09:19 am Comment from: mike_in_helsinki

@Anti-RD-Man

Show some specific examples of what you are talking about in Dilger being a fanboy and not speaking fact.

Or are you too much of a yellow belly, stinking, drive-by coward to do the work?

Dec 06, 07 - 10:06 am Comment from: British Mac Head

I just read the RD article and have been reminded why I love Roughly Drafted so much.

Not only does it show how Dilger doesn't suffer fools gladly it also reminds me about other stupid predictions I've heard over the years from people who shouldn't have the title of technical journalist.

Have you noticed how Dilger's main weapon is common sense. He's right, it would be pointless to emulate the Windows API in OS X. Not only would it kill cross platform development it would be easily circumvented by Microsoft.

And his prediction that Microsoft will fall from monopolistic power just like IBM did is right on the money. I have been saying this since Vista was lauded as the failure it turned out to be. That's possibly the only sensible prediction I have heard in the computing industry for ages!!!

Dilger. We salute you!!!

the iPhone was talked about for years, though of as yet this myth came true... the idea of having 1% market share seemed like an feat unachievable to many but iPhone is done extremely well and will continue to do so.

OSX was PPC for sometime before the secret came out, yes some claimed it to be a myth but Apple had OSX ready simultaneously as x86 code as well.

Apple has transplanted it's brain more times then any other computer company by dumping Motorola, then IBM, and going with Intel. Always, challenging those in the know and shocking us all with success after success.

The trend generally expresses that the MYTHS generally evolve into reality.

And what Daniel Eran Dilger seems to have forgotten is Apple should never be underestimated. If Apple sees need FROM customers and wishes to attempt the seemingly IMPOSSIBLE it usually does it.

So as reasonable Mr. Dilger is, I trust time rather then him. Not that I am hopeful... (I am no window user) just that I will believe it when I see it. Or wait for Jobs to tell us it just isn't coming.

Dec 06, 07 - 11:13 am Comment from: shiftOpt k

I'm glad to hear this. Quite frankly I DO NOT want windows anything on my Mac. Very little, if any, good can come of it (esp running apps natively in OS X)… but then, I don't have a need for any windows apps either.

just my 2¢

Dec 06, 07 - 11:17 am Comment from: shiftOpt k

"So as reasonable Mr. Dilger is, I trust time rather then him. Not that I am hopeful... (I am no window user) just that I will believe it when I see it. Or wait for Jobs to tell us it just isn't coming."

i concur

Is Red Box Myth.

Yellow Box has come true!

Bill & Steve doen't see eye to eye.
But Bill bought a portion of Apple and saved them during bad times.

We the customers and general tech people who seem to be in the know DO NOT TRULY know exactly what these two men had in the works.

Is the ultimate plan that Apple gives OSX to Microsoft in the end.
The battle is over. Maybe Steve is just holding up his part of the deal by completing the ENTIRE transition of MAC.
We see this convergence of machines, softwares, processors, coding, and possible APIs INTO one platform... afterall everything is looking like OSX anyways!

Perhaps this is the future... not for Apple (as they want to be in the small device market with scalable OSX) but for Apple to hand over to Microsoft who rules the pc market and where they can continue to screw with.

OK I was joking.

DID I want OSX over OS 9 - no but I changed
DID I want Yellow Box - no - but seems it helped me somewhere
Do I want Red Box - no - I don't know - but if it comes maybe good

I just wanted myMAC as MAC and to be happy with it.

I guess we Mac folk can adapt easily. Lets rejoice!

Dec 06, 07 - 11:39 am Comment from: Mr. Reeee

Why would we WANT native Windows apps to run natively under Mac OS X ? That's like sticking a Ford engine in to a Porsche or BMW.

The first thing it would do would be to KILL a big chunk of multi-platform software development. Mac-Only developers, who see the light, would probably keep at it. But even now we see companies announce Mac compatibility, but in small print say that it requires Boot Camp and XP. That's pure bullshit, NOT Mac development.

Roughly Drafted articles are entertaining, but WAY too LONG. I LIKE the fact that he goes waaaay over the top sometimes, all the way to Stupidville. YEAH, he's a full-blooded MacGuy™... so that's news? It's fun. So what!

My real question: Where on Earth does this guy find the time to write so much. He needs an editor!

There are so many bone-headed commentators making up all kinds of idiotic, web-hit-hunting jabs, predictions, prognostications and outright lies about All Things Apple, that it's refreshing to find someone so firmly and unapologetically rooted on OUR SIDE!!!

Windows HAS Jumped the Shark!

I discovered Daniel Eran Dilger about a year ago and I find his material very informative, factual, straightforward, entertaining, and of course - Mac-centric. Whether is he is or isn't an Apple "fanboy" (and I don't believe he really fits the definition), is irrelevant as long as his writings are reasonable and backed up by real research and facts.

He may not always be correct in his predictions, but he owns up to his failings and since his views have their basis in actual research (i.e., he doesn't pull assertions out of his rear end as do folks such as Dvorak, Enderle and Thurrott) he can always track back to why his reasoning may have been faulty.

I challenge anyone who has posted negative remarks about him on this website to come up with specific assertions he has made which were specious or fall into the realm of "fan-boyism".

What I enjoy most about Daniel Eran Dilger is that I ALWAYS learn something new whenever I read his articles.

MAC= Media Access Control, number semi-unique to your network adapter used by layer 2(data link) or a brand of makeup.

Why do some of you love your number partially id'ing you on the network or a brand of cosmetics?
Why do you want the MAC number to perform more stuff-like run windows?

Wasn't this "red box" project the project which was running OSX on Intel hardware and kept in total secret?
So what about this "myth"?

Well informed "journalist"..