MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

The best case scenario, which some people appear to be working on, would be running Windows and Linux apps while bypassing their entire operating systems. WOOT!!

http://musobs.blogspot.com/

I'll keep both duo's doing OSX though it's easy to see that this overcomes many hurdles for the folk who have that one legacy app that only runs on Windows.

The market share is heading towards dobling in the next 18 months anyway. This might ultimately lead to a quadrupling..

Disagree. It would stunt the growth or migration of OS X apps. Why develop for OS X when people can run Windoze via virtualization. AutoCad needs to be convinced to port their app to OS X and all its benefits.

I concur...Mr. Jobs definitely has something up his sleeve and I think it is going to be just that - to run any application at useable speeds on the most beautifully designed Apple machines.

We shall wait and see what happens at WWDC...

Your Windows are belong to us!

1994: Power PC means you can run Windows and Windows apps on a Mac!!! Huzzah!!!!

(The catch--slow as molasses)


2006: Intel Chips mean you can run Windows and Windows apps on a Mac!!! Huzzah!!!!

Ho-hum.

PC users frustrated with Microsoft's inability to design a better OS, and angered with Microsoft's requirements that Vista users purchase a completely new system would likely give strong consideration for choosing a Mac running Windows applications at native speed.

I keep telling you bimbos

It's not going to happen, at best you will be able to run pre-vista windows programs in a window on Mac OS X.

But your not going to be able to run Vista or it's programs without VPC under Mac OS X.

What may happen is a Apple will provide compiler so tweaked Vista code can be easily compiled for Mactels without significant development time.

This alone in itself will motivate developers to provide two versions of their software on each disk.

One developer base, one hardware base, two operating system choices.

This is the only way Apple can compete.

This is the system for me. OS X and Linux running at the same time. Screw Windows, as far as my own personal use is concerned. But for gaining Windows -> OS X switchers, this is dynamite. And when the Windows on Mac users notice that their systems only get corrupted while running Windows, many will make the obvious move.

Great. Now we don't have to develop a separate version of Photoshop. Want the latest and greatest version? Run the Windows app.

You've saved me loadsa dough. Thanks, f*ckwits!

Nice take MDN; couldn't have said it any better. You are a dude!

Adobe el Presidente said: "Great. Now we don't have to develop a separate version of Photoshop. Want the latest and greatest version? Run the Windows app."

The problem Mr. President, is while you will limit your offering to a Windblows version, Apple and others will take advantage of OS X's specific advanced features. Which will probably continue to be way ahead of Winblows. So your offering will be inferior and offer much less value. Good luck though!

In this scenerio the only one making Apple software will be Apple.
Everyone else will make a Windows version that runs on a mactel.

MacMania - "....OS X's specific advanced features.W

Macmania - what are they and what does the current Mac offerings from Adobe and Macromedia make them different from the Windows version?

I have a Mac and PC with adobe and macromedia software running on both. I see know difference in the software. In fact, on the PC the software runs faster.

Apple could buy Quark, Adobe or give us, Aperture Express, DVD Studio Express and disign kind app like ilustrator and other apps need to graphc area.

No company is obligated to make software for any PC or Mac. The motives have been, and always will be, making a profit and establishing market share.

Your likes, dislikes, wants, needs, and desires may influence, but do not guarantee, what may or may not be released this year or the next. If you want charity call the Salvation Army.

Own Mac and PC said: "Macmania - what are they and what does the current Mac offerings from Adobe and Macromedia make them different from the Windows version?"

Most of us also have a peecee kicking around somewhere, in a basement, coat closet, what have you. I use my peecee to run Act!, a windbows only PIM. I have an important client that sends me list in this format so I reluctantly keep it around.

I don't use Photoshop on the peecee so I can't report on that. I do however on occasion use M$ Orifice on the peecee and on my Macs. The difference between the features, functionality and usability between the two different OS versions Word, Excel, etc. is striking! Others in print and in blogs also agree that the OS X version is far superior.

As to the OS specific technologies that are way more advanced on Macintosh than on Winblows, there are many: 'nix security, spotlight, exposé, core audio, etc., etc., etc. There are a ton of applications that take full advantage of these OS X specific advantages.

BTW, if you use a Mac and you're not aware of all this shit, have you been paying attention?

meatofmoose - I bet you spend a half hour writing that 4 sentence sermon.

If this happens, there will be a HUGE financial disincentive for companies to continue developing Mac-native applications. They'll just develop a Winblows-native app and expect us to run it in virtualization. Then, we'll be stuck using shitty, ugly, unintuitive Winblows apps.

:-(

I've been waiting for this discussion for my first post. There is somebody I know, who has been dealing with Apple for quite some time. He and I ran into each other the other day, and were discussing the new Imacs w/Intel processors. I am no techie, but love Apple products, and beg him for info. He went on to tell me, without revealing too much, that he installed and ran Microsoft Publisher, and made a 17 page(?) flyer on it. I asked him if he ran it through Rosetta, and he said no, that he actually installed it in the Applications menu, and ran it. He said it was possible through the new Intel Processor, and some new code, and it wasn't very difficult to do. He said OSX has the ability to read and distinguish the different programs, and if it recognized a MS program, would run this through the additional coding.(?) He also said he had never ran Publisher, so he didn't know if it was running slower than it would on a PC, but he said it was still plenty fast for him, and he said he was pretty suprised, but pleased it ran seamlessly, with no hiccups. This gentleman had to "dumn down" this conversation, as I've written, I am no techie, so I'm paraphrasing pretty much everything he said. I then showed him the software I use for my business, and asked him if he thought it would run on the new Macs, and he said "Without a doubt." Apple obviously isn't advertising this, but if it is true, and I don't have any reason to believe it is not, this is huge.

In some cases, maybe some companies will choose only the Windows version.

But they will be the marginal ones. The smart ones (and why would we want to deal with anyone else?) will develop for the best OS.

And we know which one that is. Don't we?

Well, don't we? I actually wonder about some of you, and what you really do believe.

I say multi-operating systems on a Mac is AWESOME but to integrate multi-operating system Apps on OS X...not so awesome....


Because you'll be porting a lot of mal-ware spy-ware and crap along with it.


If I need to run a windows program, then I want to run it on windows. But when I'm living my life, I want it OS X and OS X only.

Uday wrote:

"1994: Power PC means you can run Windows and Windows apps on a Mac!!! Huzzah!!!!"

Heh. I remember at one point the pitch was "The PowerPC will be SO good, you'll be able to run MacOS, Windows, and Linux. All SIMULTANEOUSLY! And at full speed!".

When it comes to multi-running anything (and having it be good enough to matter), I'll believe it when I see it.

All you "Why would developers develop for OS X if the Mac can run Windows" bozos have no clue. Why the heck do you think they develop for OS X now? Because Apple has market share?

In a word, DUH!!!!!!!!!

What I'm saying here, for those of you who can't put two and two together (I'm still talking to the same bozos) is that if someone chose to develop for OS X before, they're gong to continue to develop for OS X. And nothing will stop them from continuing to do so, because their apps run better in OS X than Windows. Now that people can say screw you to Microsoft, there will be MORE people to develop OS X programs for.

Put 2 and 2 together and what do you get? FIVE!

If you want to see how fast virtualization can be, just install the Linux-powered Asterisk@Home PBX on your Windows XP desktop using VMware's free client. It's almost the same speed as building a Linux box and running the code natively. You can find the free download here:

http://nerdvittles.com/

If Linux runs this well on a Windows machine, just think of the possibilities once Windows can be virtualized on the Mac desktop.
Plus you can kiss all those viruses, trojans, and adware blues goodbye forever.

I'm torn on this issue. I guess if Windows OS applications could run natively through OSX, and avoiding the viruses asociated with Windows, then that would be a good thing.
I need to keep reminding myself that Apple is primarily a hardware company. And if due to dual-booting or a universal OS more Macs are sold, then that is a good thing. The question is if this happens will OSX thrive or eventually just become Windows?

Yeh-heh-hesssss, I love it! All de speculation and worrying. Stop it, my friends. You don't want to get so many worry lines you end up looking like Robert Redford on a bad day.

Ohh, and hey, Big Bob Ass -- What's your friend's name? Wait a minute. Let me guess . . .

Deep Code?

Yeh-heh-hessssssssssss.

Janice:

So, you can count to four. What other amazing tricks can you do?

In a flight across the county yesterday I was using my Powerbook when the flight attendant got my attention. She said, I'm sorry you will have to turn that laptop off. Strange I thought we still had a ways to go. I asked her politely, why? What is the problem? She said, I'm sorry but you are sitting in a Window seat.

Thanks Woz!

Great. Now we don't have to develop a separate version of Photoshop. Want the latest and greatest version? Run the Windows app.

Every Windows app I've had to use sucked donkey bars. Photoshop for Mac is a better version, as there are features either missing or very hard to find in the Windows version, and Windows users can't help you as they don't know what they're missing. Kinda sad, really, but they defend Windows like it's their autistic child.

There are also more and better filters and plug-ins available for the Mac versions. I would quit doing digital printmaking, which I do for a living, if I had to do it in Windows. I couldn't work at the level I work at now, and the aggravation wouldn't be worth it.

Macmania - "BTW, if you use a Mac and you're not aware of all this shit, have you been paying attention?"

I made the comment because obviously you do not use Photoshop on Windows or you wouldn´t have made your "open mouth insert foot" opinion. Since you don´t use any pro software that Adobe or Macromedia offers, guess its best for you not to comment on these things. And you compare a brand new OSX Mac of yours software and an old PC (probably runs Windows 95) you keep in the closet....brillant.

neomonkey (aka macmania): "Photoshop for Mac is a better version, as there are features either missing or very hard to find in the Windows version"

What are these things missing?

By day I work with Photoshop on a PC, by night at home I work with Photoshop on my Mac.

neomonkey: "There are also more and better filters and plug-ins available for the Mac versions. I would quit doing digital printmaking, which I do for a living, if I had to do it in Windows. I couldn't work at the level I work at now, and the aggravation wouldn't be worth it."

What total bullsh=t FUD.

This is the all time greatest IDIOT and I mean IDIOT

I wish I had the time this nut case had to make a video about Macs becoming Disney characters.
check this out for a chuckle or two.

http://www.youtube.com/w/The-Best-Idea-Steve-Jobs-Doesnt-Know-About.?v=z_txu6gfqMw&search=steve jobs

Microsoft would like to take the opportunity to thank each and every one of you for your enthusiastic endorsement in growing Windows Operating Systems and application software to now include the Apple hardware space.

Your continued support in growing the Windows installed base and vast ecosystem of Windows applications and software will provide customers with a unified experience regardless of underlying hardware, while removing the limited application choices experienced with non-Microsoft platforms.

Regards,

Microsoft Sales

What a shame that so many people wish that a bloated, expensive, dated hack like AutoCAD run on Macs. I guess it's similar to the bloated, expensive, dated hack of an OS it runs on, Windows. There are numerous better, intuitive CAD applications on the market that put AutoCAD to SHAME: ArchiCAD, VectorWorks and BOA, to name 3.

Yeah, it's the "industry standard", but according to sites like Architosh, AutoCAD's market share has been steadily declining and is at 50%, including ALL computing platforms, and dropping.

If AutoDesk would publish the ENTIRE AutoCAD file format (DXF/DWG) specs, then it would be easier for their files to co-habit and play nice with the better applications on the market.

You ever hear of any Windows users wishing they could run OSX on their computers??????

You run Windows on your Mac you get to pay Bill Gates a fee to run his operating system. Bill will be one happy monkey.

Windozs drones LOL
<<You ever hear of any Windows users wishing they could run OSX on their computers??????>>

YES THREE OF MY FRIENDS, they took one look and made the switch...you can do it to, come see the light.

See the light.. Windows scuks, Vista is already hacked, the future is OSX....

In Photoshop for Windows you can open a new file by double-clicking anywhere in the background workspace in the app window, on a Mac you cant do this as the workspace is the desktop background.
Does anyone know if this feature is possible on Macs?

why are we talking about windows again. once the developers start writting their application as universal binary it will make scene to write one application that will work on mac/intel, mac/ppc and windowpc. For one cost you can sale to all computer user. Now it up to the mac to be the best so people will buy the best.

bigbobbass:
He went on to tell me, without revealing too much, that he installed and ran Microsoft Publisher, and made a 17 page(?) flyer on it.

Didn't Publisher have to phone home to Microsoft first to be registered? When you register a Win OS or software app - it actually uses a unique identifier that is in every current generation x86 chip which helps cut down on piracy. Unless of course this was a hacked version......

To accomplish paravirtualization, "Intel would have to release new Core Duo CPUs that have VT support which is likely in the near future. Apple would have to implement a BIOS compatibility layer for EFI to support bare-metal installation of Windows that only support the conventional BIOS although this is currently just speculation.

Keyword: SPECULATION

I don't see it.........

What may happen is Apple will provide a compiler so tweaked Vista code can be easily compiled for Mactels without significant development time.

This alone in itself will motivate developers to provide two versions of their software on each disk.

One developer base, one hardware base, two operating system choices.

This is the only way Apple can compete.


Once again, I am in total agreement with MacDude.

Just as Universal Binaries are being made by Mac developers today, You will probably see software coming out on DVD with a MAC and Windows version.

The core code will be the same, but it will have to be tweaked to comply with both OS/GUI guidelines. This will be a huge incentive to develop for the Mac as the cost savings will be enormous. I just don't want to have Windows clone versions of software - I want them to take advantage of OS X. Probably in the short term we will see plain ports that aren't very much different looking than their Win counterparts, but, given time, I think the Mac versions will become more "Mac-like"........

Microsoft Sales wrote:


"Microsoft would like to take the opportunity to thank each and every one of you for your enthusiastic endorsement in growing Windows Operating Systems and application software to now include the Apple hardware space.

Your continued support in growing the Windows installed base and vast ecosystem of Windows applications and software will provide customers with a unified experience regardless of underlying hardware, while removing the limited application choices experienced with non-Microsoft platforms."

Somehow I can picture Big Brother in the 1984 ad saying that. Along with:

Our enemies shall talk themselves to death and we will bury them with their own confusion...

I doubt Apple will actively encourage the running of Windows on the Mac, except maybe to support further development of Virtual PC. The tech-savvy will work it out for themselves, and the average Joe won't know or care because he'll be buying a Mac for Mac OS X and iLife (as will most people).

And it's for the latter reason that Windows on Mac won't threaten Mac software development.

The big stumbling block in many PC users view to using a Mac is that it does not run Windows software - it is not "compatible". If/when Windows programs can run on Macs that excuse will disappear and more people will use Macs. The more people that use Macs the more software that will be written for Macs.

Apple have one goal - to enable all third party software houses to create a SINGLE unified version of their products which will be completely platform independent. In future there will be no 'Mac' versions or 'Windows' versions of software titles - just one 'Universal' version that will run on any modern system. Then the fuss about less 'Mac' apps not being available (because of lower market share) will become irrelevant and third-party firms will save a fortune writing second versions for a smaller financial return from Mac users.

And, of course, people will have no excuse NOT to buy the best computer/OS on the planet.

neomonkey---sez--- >...Photoshop for Mac is a better version, as there are features either missing or very hard to find in the Windows version...<

Hey, neo what in the hell are you talking about???

One just needs to read this sentence "Apple would have to implement a BIOS compatibility layer for EFI to support bare-metal installation of Windows that only support the conventional BIOS...".

People who actually think that companies should invest time and money in something that has been outdated for years do not need to get any more attention.

neomonkey:

Please identify the name, address, and URL of your business. I want to make certain I never make the mistake of choosing your establishment for any editing or print work. Thank you.

Mac users tend to get more out of the box then that of PC users.
so then why does winblow users say we pay more for hardware?
most of my friends use windozs and none them even heard of windows media center edition pcs why is that?
I love that windozs users have to pay for something that should already be built into the OS (SECURITY)