FWB Real PC

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
I remember rumors of this a couple months ago... and then rumors of outlandish claims by management, management changes, and M$ trying to crush them. Has there been any news on this at all since June?



Hope Springs Eternal,



Mandricard

AppleOutsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 11
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Last I heard they were working on bringing it back to marketability, but they were also distancing themselves from the outlandish promises that one guy made.



    Right now, it's "we'll see how good we can get it, and ship it when it's done," which means the engineers are back in charge.
  • Reply 2 of 11
    torifiletorifile Posts: 4,024member
    Well, it was all a sham. http://www.fwb.com/html/about_realpc.html



    What a crock!
  • Reply 3 of 11
    leonisleonis Posts: 3,427member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by torifile

    Well, it was all a sham. http://www.fwb.com/html/about_realpc.html



    What a crock!






    Simple. Just don't buy ANY of their product at all as a dispute.
  • Reply 4 of 11
    pbpb Posts: 4,234member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by torifile

    Well, it was all a sham. http://www.fwb.com/html/about_realpc.html





    Now this means that Microsoft is left alone in this field. A little scary I would say...
  • Reply 5 of 11
    nofeernofeer Posts: 2,422member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by PB

    Now this means that Microsoft is left alone in this field. A little scary I would say...



    it's another way ms crushes and tries to control software e.g netscape and others. would it be worth while for apple to develope it or buy real pc or would that ire ms and put pressure on mac office? you would think this would be part of the antitrust lawsuit solutions to encourage compettition. ms wants to be the only only game in town and try to strangle apple and especially linux. after this virus stampede i bet more and more schools, and business are looking for alternatives. virus's with the inhierant security weakness of windows.
  • Reply 6 of 11
    Quote:

    Originally posted by torifile

    Well, it was all a sham. http://www.fwb.com/html/about_realpc.html



    What a crock!




  • Reply 7 of 11
    fahlmanfahlman Posts: 723member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by NOFEER

    would it be worth while for apple to develope it or buy real pc or would that ire ms and put pressure on mac office?



    Apple could make a compatibility layer similar to Classic, but for 486 emulation. Let's imagine that Apple does this, and it's 90% efficient. First Microsoft still makes money off of sale of Windows XP. Second, they could begin producing all their software for only the Windows platform. Microsoft doesn't care what hardware you buy, they don't make hardware. They make software. Software that if it could run on your Mac they would be happy to sell it to you. If you buy their software they profit. This is the reason that they make Office for Mac. They make money from Office from Mac.
  • Reply 8 of 11
    Quote:

    Originally posted by NOFEER

    it's another way ms crushes and tries to control software e.g netscape and others. would it be worth while for apple to develope it or buy real pc or would that ire ms and put pressure on mac office? you would think this would be part of the antitrust lawsuit solutions to encourage compettition. ms wants to be the only only game in town and try to strangle apple and especially linux. after this virus stampede i bet more and more schools, and business are looking for alternatives. virus's with the inhierant security weakness of windows.



    Steady on...have MS said they're going to kill VPC? Haven't they just released a rebranded version? I like a good conspiracy theory but all this knee-jerk "everything Apple good, everything Microsoft bad - ug!" tub-thumping (it's certainly not just you, NOFFER) lacks perspective and ignores the fact that:-

    a) MS is the world's largest developer of Mac software

    b) MS makes money from this software

    c) Most MS software for the Mac is pretty good (The Blue Meanie uses Office vX so he knows whereof he speaks)

    d) Some Apple software for the Mac has problems (Safari still chokes on some sites) or just plain sucks (Appleworks still doesn't use cocoa sheets more than two years after the introduction of Mac OS X; treacle slow iCal)
  • Reply 9 of 11
    709709 Posts: 2,016member
    That sucks. I really had my hopes up for RealPC. Especially since VPC 6.1 *won't* work on a G5 (according to a blurb on MOSR anyways):



    Quote:

    Issue Description:

    ==============

    You are using Virtual PC 6.1 and wish to purchase a Macintosh G5 computer, but would like to know if the Virtual PC 6.1 will be compatible with them.



    Virtual PC for Mac Version 6.1 relies on a feature of the PowerPC G3 and G4 processors called 'pseudo little-endian mode' for increased performance when emulating a Pentium processor. Current versions of Virtual PC require this feature in order to function. Because the new G5 processor does not support this feature, large portions of the VPC for Mac program must be rewritten and carefully tested to work properly on the G5 CPU.



    Please check the Mactopia web site at http://www.microsoft.com/mac regularly for any further information.



    And G5-optimization not expected until 'well into' 2004.



    Maybe we'll get VPC7 when Longhorn comes out.
  • Reply 10 of 11
    hobbeshobbes Posts: 1,252member
    Disappointing.



    Well, it looks like Bochs is going to be VPC's only competitor. And Bochs is rather behind at this point...
  • Reply 11 of 11
    big macbig mac Posts: 480member
    What does everyone make of the MS claim that VPC can't run unmodified on the G5 because it lacks "pseudo-little endian" support? Check the story out on MacNN. According to some, while the G5 provides support for both big and little endian numbering, it lacks pseudo mode which allows the processor to run in both modes at the same time. The G3 and G4 had this capability.
Sign In or Register to comment.