BusinessWeek, Panther & Windows compatibility

rokrok
Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
posted by MacMinute, MacRumors, among others:



Quote:

BusinessWeek reports on Apple's success in switching some users. Curiously, it notes the following:



Next, Apple's newest version of OS X, called Panther -- which is scheduled to debut later this year -- will let corporations run Windows applications on their Macs. That's a major plus, considering that nearly all companies use Windows.



At the moment, this odd claim can only be written off as a mistake -- despite the fact that the article goes on to say that Greg Maynes of the Maynes Associates Architects claims "such compatibility is a major selling point".



um, how much you wanna bet that they mistook the "works great on windows networks with other windows machines" (e.g. zip compression built-in, samba, et al.) to mean it can run windows?



'course, then again, has anyone actually TRIED to run an .exe on panther yet??? i think i will soil myself if someone says it works.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 4
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,423member
    This sounds like a definite mistake.



    Despite it's ubuiquity I don't find many PC apps that I consider exemplarary. I would rather Apple keep focusing on making the Macintosh experience the best and let 3rd parties focus on the Windows compatability.
  • Reply 2 of 4
    cubedudecubedude Posts: 1,556member
    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=28700



    We already have a thread about this.
  • Reply 3 of 4
    rokrok Posts: 3,519member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by CubeDude

    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=28700



    We already have a thread about this.




    technically, it's not the same, as my thread is about businessweek's claims, not newsweek's, and says so in the thread title. plus, doesn't it strike anyone else as odd that TWO major publications have made the same "mistake"?



    anyway, i know i'm being nitpicky.
  • Reply 4 of 4
    The other thread has a typo. It's about the same article. Use that one.



    It's most likely a misinformed writer or a writer who is confused about the terminology. Don't read too much into this.
Sign In or Register to comment.