Tiger to run Windows apps?

murkmurk
Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
Stumbled on Mathew Rothenberg's (possibly aka Mac the Knife & Naked Mole Rat) blog and was surprised that he was expecting this to be a feature discussed at WWDC. On Aug. 28 he still holds out hope that it will be one of the yet unannounced features. I know he's be wrong before, notably about Tablet Macs, but I get the feeling that he has heard actual rumblings about these things. The thing I am wondering about is if such a feature is planned, when would it fit into Apple's strategies. We all know the "Why would anyone write for a Mac" argument. That was true in the past, but most of the existing apps that will be ported to X, are already here. I'm sure Apple is beginning to worry about new generations of software. Isn't that what the new technologies like Core Image and Video are pointing toward. Apple's own application work is pointing in this direction also. As X evolves and Apple adds new technologies that developers will want to exploit, would the "Why would anyone write for a Mac" lose relevance? Especially with Apple leading the way with its own brave new generation of software? At that point, wouldn't the ability to run all the legacy Windows apps be a bonus? If so, when would Apple play this card? Maybe 10.5?



http://blog.ziffdavis.com/rothenberg...8/28/1870.aspx

http://blog.ziffdavis.com/rothenberg...6/26/1349.aspx
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 47
    amoryaamorya Posts: 1,103member
    Even if it wasn't a political not-going-to-happen situation, it'd require Apple rewriting huge amounts of the OS to port it to a line of processors that aren't as powerful anyway, then getting users to replace all their hardware.



    Not going to happen. Sorry!



    Look at DarWine for the closest solution you're going to get.





    Amorya
  • Reply 2 of 47
    mmmpiemmmpie Posts: 628member
    Id be surprised if Apple put windows emulation into OS X. I just dont think it needs it in a serious way, and for users who do need Virtual PC does the job quite nicely.



    What I could see happening is a return to the old rhapsody plan of having a cocoa runtime for windows.
  • Reply 3 of 47
    webmailwebmail Posts: 639member
    Those links are to a site from a guy who is a known moron. If you have any REAL links to this I'd like to see them.



    Thanks ;-)
  • Reply 4 of 47
    aftershockaftershock Posts: 82member
    There's always the possibility of this to make it into OSX.
  • Reply 5 of 47
    kim kap solkim kap sol Posts: 2,987member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aftershock

    There's always the possibility of this to make it into OSX.



    I think Amorya beat you to it.
  • Reply 6 of 47
    mikefmikef Posts: 698member
    Bah, if you want to run Windows apps, run Windows... choose the OS that's best suited to your task. If the apps you need to run are for Windows, then it's the logical choice. I say the same thing to Linux users asking how to run Windows apps under Linux.
  • Reply 7 of 47
    murkmurk Posts: 935member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by mikef

    Bah, if you want to run Windows apps, run Windows... choose the OS that's best suited to your task. If the apps you need to run are for Windows, then it's the logical choice. I say the same thing to Linux users asking how to run Windows apps under Linux.



    I've used Macs probably longer than most of the whipper snappers here, and I have never once needed to run a Windows app. Still, my point is that at some point might this be a feature that would help lure switchers. You know the guy who doesn't want to switch because he has so much invested in his old copy of Duck Hunt. Another point I was making is Apple future is in new applications. Imagine be able to say, "Sure Duck Hunt will run on it plus you can run all this cool stuff that a PC can't." I know Windows apps running in X probably will not happen. Just speculating if there is a point at which it could pay off.



    As for Rothenberg being a moron, he's probably no Ryan Meader or he wouldn't have the job he does. Then again, maybe I'm just nostalgic for MacWeek.
  • Reply 8 of 47
    smirclesmircle Posts: 1,035member
    Everything coming from ZD and having to do with Macs is bullshit. There is not going to be any Windows emulation in Tiger.



    However, future Windows apps will be build on C#/.NET which is CPU-independent (similar to Java). With Mono, a .NET execution environment exists that was ported to MacOS X. Apple could integrate it into Tiger
  • Reply 9 of 47
    placeboplacebo Posts: 5,767member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Amorya

    Even if it wasn't a political not-going-to-happen situation, it'd require Apple rewriting huge amounts of the OS to port it to a line of processors that aren't as powerful anyway, then getting users to replace all their hardware.



    Not going to happen. Sorry!



    Look at DarWine for the closest solution you're going to get.





    Amorya



    Uh...PCs with less powerful processors? Are you going by the Apple site benchmarks or something?
  • Reply 10 of 47
    masonmcdmasonmcd Posts: 43member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Smircle

    Everything coming from ZD and having to do with Macs is bullshit. There is not going to be any Windows emulation in Tiger.



    However, future Windows apps will be build on C#/.NET which is CPU-independent (similar to Java). With Mono, a .NET execution environment exists that was ported to MacOS X. Apple could integrate it into Tiger



    Virtual PC by itself will cost about $75-$100 bucks. Throw in a licensed copy of Win XP or 2K and that's an extra $150 probably.



    For $300, go grab a whitebox PC and run Windows natively.
  • Reply 11 of 47
    mikefmikef Posts: 698member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by MasonMcD

    For $300, go grab a whitebox PC and run Windows natively.



    Seems like the logical solution to me.
  • Reply 12 of 47
    thinkingdifferentthinkingdifferent Posts: 1,604member
    Apple doesn't need a PC compatible Mac.
  • Reply 13 of 47
    lemon bon bonlemon bon bon Posts: 2,383member
    Quote:

    Another point I was making is Apple future is in new applications. Imagine be able to say, "Sure Duck Hunt will run on it plus you can run all this cool stuff that a PC can't." I know Windows apps running in X probably will not happen. Just speculating if there is a point at which it could pay off.



    Yeah. Good points.



    However, there is no iMac G5 on the PC land.



    There will be no 'Tiger' equiv' on the PC Land.



    There is nothing like Motion in PC Land for price.



    There is nothing like DVD Studio Pro on PC Land.



    Nothing like iapps on PC land re: elegant AIO solution.



    Final Cut...the Production Suite...the integration...the grace, the elegance...the simplicity...the power.



    It's all coming together. IF you want Studio Max, get a PC and run it.



    I did.



    But I still want my non-virus Mac, anticipate both 'Tiger' and Antares.



    I'm at peace with myself...almost.



    Antares. Tiger.





    Who's a happy Lemon?





    Lemon Bon Bon
  • Reply 14 of 47
    lemon bon bonlemon bon bon Posts: 2,383member
    Might be a good 'switchers' argument for the 'sale' at Apple Stores. 'We'll run your old apps in 'legacy' mode...'



    ie Win 32.



    Hmmm. Could do. Ie, provide limited compatibility for old Windows apps...to reduce the 'Mac software equivalents outlay'.



    But it seems more and more people are prepared to just dump windows virus and go Mac.



    You get iApps.



    You get Final Cut 'Production Suite' at compelling prices.



    Many PC software makers do great crossgrade Mac prices.



    Curious Labs 'Poser 5' being a case in point. Some offer multi-OS disk software.



    Still an issue Apple needs to address in order to make PC man switch.



    But Apple are making a compelling 'sod it' I'll switch anyway case.



    Apple's software is just about the best in the business...and they haven't stopped yet...any arguments?



    Lemon Bon Bon
  • Reply 15 of 47
    murkmurk Posts: 935member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon

    Yeah. Good points.



    However, there is no iMac G5 on the PC land.



    There will be no 'Tiger' equiv' on the PC Land.



    There is nothing like Motion in PC Land for price.



    There is nothing like DVD Studio Pro on PC Land.



    Nothing like iapps on PC land re: elegant AIO solution.



    Final Cut...the Production Suite...the integration...the grace, the elegance...the simplicity...the power.



    It's all coming together. IF you want Studio Max, get a PC and run it.





    I don't want no stinkin' PC. Hell, I can't even think of a Windows app I want to run. There are plenty of Mac apps that I wouldn't want to live without and you list many of them. This is one of the points I was trying to make. As Apple pushes the envelope with its software, it is more and more in control of its own future. All the cool stuff are belong to us.



    Rothenberg's blog just got me thinking about the old argument about developers would no longer write for the Mac if it also ran Windows apps. Again, I'm not saying that Apple will offer Windows apps running in X, but I am saying I think this someday no longer be a valid argument. Up until now, a lot of the focus on X has been bringing it up to par with OS 9 and trying to update old apps to work with it. I'm suggesting we are turning a corner. New technology is Apple's future. It's the stuff that might finally grow market share. And Apple is creating this new stuff itself, as well as offering the technology up to Mac developers. That will keep the developers here, and hopefully create a new generation of them. At that point, if they could pull off Win 32 apps running inside X it would be a bonus like Classic support was. It would not be earthshaking, but it would probably help instead of harm the platform. I can't say if the benefit would be worth all the work, however, so I will leave that decision to Steve. I also dream of the day Apple will no longer have to kiss Microsoft and Adobe butt.
  • Reply 16 of 47
    backwardsbackwards Posts: 5member
    Have you seen this http://www.transitive.com/ ?



    If Apple licenses that technology and incorporates it into Mac OS X they could atleast claim full compatibility with all PC games.



    Its even suggested in this Wired article: http://www.wired.com/news/technology...w=wn_tophead_2



    Wouldn't that be great?
  • Reply 17 of 47
    murkmurk Posts: 935member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Backwards

    Have you seen this http://www.transitive.com/ ?



    If Apple licenses that technology and incorporates it into Mac OS X they could atleast claim full compatibility with all PC games.



    Its even suggested in this Wired article: http://www.wired.com/news/technology...w=wn_tophead_2



    Wouldn't that be great?



    Nah! Just buy a PC instead.



    I'm joining the crowd.
  • Reply 18 of 47
    murkmurk Posts: 935member
    Quote:

    Transitive said it already has six customers -- all PC manufacturers -- but declined to name them. The first will go public later this year, Transitive said.



    Gee, I wonder. Nah, couldn't be. Could it?
  • Reply 19 of 47
    murkmurk Posts: 935member
    Just wondering here, but this also could make any advantage the Mac had mute (application, not OS). It works both ways. Maybe knowledge of this is also pushing Apple into the next generation of software technologies. I mean it's doubtful that this would support Core Image and Video, etc.. The past is the past and this development might finally lay it to rest. Bring on the future. MS hates the future. They are not sure they can control it.



    Any chance Apple owns part of this startup?
  • Reply 20 of 47
    murkmurk Posts: 935member
    Remember this argument? Linux in 10.4



    Could it be? Nah! Could it?



    (Doing my best Kormac style work here. )
Sign In or Register to comment.