Running PC's on a Mac

I don't believe you. Sorry.

my only concern is that companies like adobe would drop their mac os versions and then say bye bye to cocoa, and the aqua interface systemwide..

Yes, of course...instead of showing it to the world, they showed it to people where you 'teach'. Apple aaaaalways shows off their great innovations that way.

I don't believe that Apple previewed new, as-yet unreleased technology to your group. If I'm wrong, then tell us about it.

Was this before or after you got them drunk?

Even if he taught at the University of Florida in Gainesville, that's only the 4th biggest college in the US. Wiki's never wrong:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._by_enrollment

Seriously though, give the guy a break. What would he have to gain by coming in here and lying about something like this? He would know that doing anything like this as a hoax would of course make him a community pariah.

I admit though it would be nice if the details were elaborated a bit. If the show was two hours long, surely they just didn't pop the PC thing in at the last 5 minutes.

Did they give a clue as to how they would run PC apps native? You'd certainly have to have some sort of Windows software in there.

Even if what you say is true, the people who give those presentations don't know anything about internal Apple projects, especially the secret ones.

sequitur, sorry about the first impression we made. And kim kap sol, attacking someone's credibility because of a low post count is a cheap shot IMO. Some of us prefer to be lurkers.

Anyway, what exactly about the Tiger app demo "blew your mind"?

Kim Kap Sol treats everybody that way. But c'mon if you work at the biggest US college then surely you are smart enough to appreciate that having a low post count and posting information like this (which is rather vague) and then instead of elaborating your info, try to defend yourself, it doesn't sound very genuine.

So in order to relieve the situation, all you need to do is give us some more information about the presentation, which is the subject of the thread.

If I can explain further, there has been speculation that Apple will make software like this for a while now and all you have literally said is that you heard a presentation where Apple folks said they are making such software. In a similar light, I can tell you that I met up with an Apple rep yesterday and he confirmed that he saw an Apple tablet with motion sensing. I'm of course lying about this but how would you know? You just have to accept that your info is too vague or expand on it.

Nobody is criticizing you for being new and if the information is genuine then I'm sure the community is very appreciative that you decided to share it. Can you at least say how they are going to do it?

Well, the title itself suggests the poster is not exactly a computer enthusiast. Run a PC on a Mac? A Mac is a PC. And they are both terms for hardware, not software.

Daffy_Duck, we realize that the term PC technically stands for Personal Computer, but as Apple's current ad campaign demonstrates, its meaning has evolved--it now stands for Windows-based computers.

Givens:

- Most (as in 99.9%) of Apples employees have NO IDEA what UNRELEASED products/features Apple has on the stove.

- Even those employees that may have had an off chance of "HEARING SOMETHING" are so in fear of loosing their job rarely repeat it except perhaps in very tight and trustworthy circles.

- Everyone knows that if it's a cool and unreleased product, upgrade and/or product feature STEVE is going to be the man doing the reveal and only at a time and place HE thinks is appropriate.

Finally....

Given the fact that you are at the largest college in the US I'm finding it hard to believe you were the only person who is 'reporting' on this.

Your report just doesn't hold water my friend... Apple can't even fart in public without making the news and yet you'd have us believe some unnamed Apple reps doing the college circuit are outing new and unheard of technology improvements and improvements as big as that?!?!

Bzzzzzt!


Oh and getting back to the 'dirt in question':

Run PC on a Mac (I'm going to assume PC was meant to be Windows)

- No Emulation
- No Translation
- No Virtualization (Parallels)
- No Rosetta Stone-like application.
- No dual boot (BootCamp)

What's left Fairy Dust?

Dave

Point taken but the title still doesn't make sense.

"I ran my VHS player on my DVD player."

Does that make sense? Only if you physically place one on top of another. My point is that the original poster doesn't seem to have mastered the concept here: running SOFTWARE from one OS on another OS. Hardware means little since Macs now have the same architecture as Windows machines.

This is a small point perhaps but for this to be believable, the poster has to establish some credibility and he hasn't done that for me.

This boils down to

- the reps did say something like "wouldn't it be great if the next thing was for OS X to run Windows apps directly", and that got interpreted (as the rep intended) as "Leopard will have a built-in Windows API"

- the reps said flat-out that it would have it, but they were just blowing smoke because they read it on one of the Mac sites.

As others have pointed out,

- if they said it, either they are spilling info they aren't supposed to have, and Steve will fire them and then sue them, or they are just making it up.

- Prior to WWDC, Steve would never authorize the reps to have feature information on Leopard. Only the execs and the engineers know these things before WWDC.

But of course we all know these things, since we are hypervigilant Apple watchers for 20+ years.

If by 'hypervigilant' you really mean insane freaks with WAY too much time on our hands... Then yes I too agree! (myself included)

Wine is open source software that runs some Windows apps without Windows but it's not a reliable solution. I doubt Apple are going this route unless they know of a way to make it real good, real fast. It would certainly work for their advertising campaign because they could explicitly say you can run Windows apps without Windows. Still, Apple would be far better off making a deal with the parallels developers IMO and trying to get hardware acceleration working.

OK, now that a have a little more information to go on, here's what I've got to say.

I am not having problems anymore with believing what you heard. I am having problems believing that the Reps know what they are talking about. Apple is all about keeping future advances a secret. Apple did not, I repeat, Apple did not tell them to tell the world this. As another poster pointed out, if this was more than speculation by the Reps then they would likely be fired. So, I think this is mere speculation by the Apple Reps. I've been reading a lot of Apple forums lately and one thing I have learned is that a lot of Apple's employees talk like they know what is going on but they really don't. You can call 5 different customer service reps about a problem and hear 5 different conclusions.

I know this sounds ridiculous, but I have heard this same thing a few times now. I have no idea if it is really true or not. It does go hand in hand with what a few people that I know and trust beleive is going to really happen (evantually). That is, OS X is going to switch to the Vista Kernel, place on top of that Cocoa, QTkit, Webkit, possibly core*, and the Apple GUI, etc. That way, you have an OS that runs both OS X (cocoa apps, actually some carbon apps should work too) and vista apps natively.

Secondarily, I have also heard that Apple may instead try to lease .NET framework and gain at least those win apps through that, if OS W (what media is calling OS X on vista) doesn't pan out.

It sounds far-fetched to me, but the more I hear and the recent directions at apple (intel transition, NeXT people leaving, a few Apple Developer note hints, bootcamp, rumors of dissatisfaction with mach, etc.)

When you spew bullshit and actually have the nerve to want anyone here to believe it, then yes, we tend not to be particularly gentleman-like.

That's not an Apple project. That's a wrapper around WINE that's been in development for years. It allows you to run Win32 API programs.

Now, let's go back to your original claim:

But it isn't new. Darwine has been around since long before the Intel Mac announcement, in roughly 2004. And WINE, which it is based on, has been around since at least 2002.

You can read up on it here. Now, next time before you make such outrageous claims, please do some research. I know you were thinking you had the scoop on something exciting, or at least intriguing, but there is honestly not a single bit of a chance that a mere campus representative would give you such inside scoop, and more importantly, let you go away with it without having you sign an NDA. Common sense (and experience with Apple's policies) dictates that.

That said, the idea of Apple including something WINE-based or similar in 10.5 is ludicrous. Even if WINE were sufficiently compatible with the larg bulk of Win32 apps, which it is not (and likely never will be), that's all moot, because WinFX is set to replace Win32, and works completely differently.

Not to mention, of course, that Microsoft wouldn't be too amused by such a step of Apple's. Don't be surprised if it would effectively kill Office for Mac.

ALL RIGHT

Sequitur, you are getting squeezed by the members here because of this quote:



You have no justification for saying that "Apple" is working on anything. That's why this crowd is not buying it. And that's why they are slamming you.

If you had just said you heard something about the concept, people would have told you about wine and so forth.

This is a tough crowd.

That said, no more personal attacks or grammar discussion is permitted and any such posts will be deleted. Sequitur, check this quote of yours


'nuff said about grammar.

You mean 1992, right?

Are you ok?
(Moderator Note: The following is output of "Pakin's Complaint Letter Generator" located at http://www.pakin.org/complaint . I am leaving it in as it might generate more confusion if I simply delete it. Kim Kap Sol did not write this.)

Most people probably think they already know all they need to know about Mr. Sequitur, but I have some new information to bring to light. The first thing I want to bring up is that I find Mr. Sequitur the most licentious person in the entire world. Whatever weight we accord to that fact, we may be confident that if Mr. Sequitur's thinking were cerebral rather than glandular, he wouldn't consider it such a good idea to marginalize me based on my gender, race, or religion. Despite his evident lack of grounding in what he's talking about, it would be wrong to imply that he is involved in some kind of conspiracy to manipulate public understanding of racism. It would be wrong because his prevarications are far beyond the conspiracy stage. Not only that, but he has stated that mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues. One clear inference from that statement -- an inference that is never really disavowed -- is that the Universe belongs to him by right. Now that's just cynical. Regardless of the theoretical beauty of the notion that I sometimes feel like Mr. Sequitur has forced us into a danse macabre with his smarmy conclusions leading us to the grave, there is the opposing fact that if Mr. Sequitur were as bright as he thinks he is, he'd know that he has compiled an impressive list of grievances against me. Not only are all of these grievances completely fictitious, but I should note that Mr. Sequitur's abysmal, unprofessional game of chess -- the self-pitying chess of absenteeism -- has continued for far too long. It's time to checkmate this hypocritical, batty troll and show him that he says that our elected officials should be available for purchase by special-interest groups. That's a stupid thing to say. It's like saying that an open party with unlimited access to alcohol can't possibly outgrow the host's ability to manage the crowd. Even by Mr. Sequitur's own account, he uses the very intellectual tools he criticizes, namely consequentialist arguments rather than arguments about truth or falsity.

Mr. Sequitur wants to impugn the patriotism of his opponents. Such intolerance is felt by all people, from every background. I guess that my take on this is that if he can overawe and befuddle a sufficient number of prominent individuals, then it will become virtually impossible for anyone to study the problem and recommend corrective action.

There are three points I need to make here. First, Mr. Sequitur is certifiably irascible. Second, when Mr. Sequitur is challenged, he either denies everything or claims that his words were taken out of context and that his enemies are plotting against him. And third, he would have us believe that we can stop mercantalism merely by permitting government officials entrée into private homes to search for sadistic mattoids. That, of course, is nonsense, total nonsense. But Mr. Sequitur is surrounded by sick delinquents who parrot the same nonsense, which is why as long as the beer keeps flowing and the paychecks keep coming, his cat's-paws don't really care that we have a dilemma of leviathan proportions on our hands: Should we take personal action and expose injustice and puncture prejudice, or is it sufficient to comment on his lamentations? The complete answer to that question is a long, sad story. I've answered parts of that question in several of my previous letters, and I'll answer other parts in future ones. For now, I'll just say that relative to just a few years ago, prolix imbeciles are nearly ten times as likely to believe that he's merely trying to make this world a better place in which to live. This is neither a coincidence nor simply a sign of the times. Rather, it reflects a sophisticated, psychological warfare program designed by Mr. Sequitur to dissolve the bonds that join individuals to their natural communities. I will never give up. I will never stop trying. And I will use every avenue possible to acquire the input of a representative cross-section of the community in a non-threatening, inclusive environment. One last thing: Mr. Sequitur represents the most recent incarnation of the unique 20th-century phenomenon known as "macabre neopaganism".

OK. let's try to get back on topic. I am now going to remove all the personal attacks (except the one from KKS that I annotated so that people know it's a joke).

Sequitur, I understand you trying to defend yourself, and if you had just said at the beginning that it was a rumor or something that you thought you heard, the response of this crowd might have been more civilized.

But you need to know that AppleInsider's purpose is to discuss rumors and future Apple actions, products, and features. As such, the members will jump on an unsubstantiated statement like Rush Limbaugh jumps on an Oxycontin 80 mg tablet. There are many many smoke-blowing posters who are trying to get attention, and by no means am I saying that was your intention (I know it wasn't), but these members here sniff out that kind of post immediately. And given the embarrassment they have experienced from "biting" in the past, they aren't always diplomatic in expressing skepticism.

Personal attacks are forbidden however, and thus I am removing them.

I didn't have much of an idea about its age. I knew it was fairly old, but thought it originated in the late 90s. I suppose it didn't become popular / useful until then.

According to my research, WINE did exist in 1993 (not 1992), but was then for Win16, and as such not very similar to what it is today.

My point stands, though. It's not a new effort or something previously unheard of, so please, sequitor, try laying off the sensationalism.

That's Darwine, not Wine. This is precisely what I previously said: