For these rare (hopefully less and less) instances, it looks like we might need software emulation afterall.
Suppose it ran both Windows and OS x. Didn't apple make a performa that had a built in DOS card years ago? The idea is obviously to give business customers a crutch, should they make the switch. I don't know how bad it is, but it seems that halfway solutions almost always fail.
Apple make good computers, they use good components etc. They just happen to be based around a PPC instruction set. If you want to run windows on your Mac, then write a nice letter to MS and ASK them to compile you a Apple / PPC version of windows.
Remember, Operating systems are designed to run on various hardware. NOT the other way round. Thus, the decision of which hardware you buy is based on which OS you think will give you the best features for your needs.
There are plenty of very good, very well designed Wintel machines around. Remember You are not going to find these machines at your local PC World / Walmart. These companies are interested in 1 thing only... the Sale!!! The quality of components comes second only to how much markup they can make on a particular brand.
The best advise is to make your own!! get onto Google and hunt down the components and reviews on the quality if these components...
Here is a start, Crucial RAM, MSI Gfx cards (nVidia / ATI chipsets) ABIT mobo's (Intel / nVidia chipsets), Maxtor HDs. etc...
These are based on continuous reviews of good quality... Not the fastest or newest! It is possible to build a "PC" as good as quality as a Mac, but you will always ruin is by running windows!!!
Edit:
An even better idea would be to write a letter of complaint to the manufacturer of DVD's stating that there are many cross platform multimetia applications (Flash / Shockwave), Java etc, and that you are very dissapointed with them and would have to take this into consideration before buying their products again.
If we all just sit here moaning on forums, these companies are never going to support OSX
Lest we forget: Commodore were easily beating most other manufacturers in the late eighties and early nineties with some exceedingly slick and powerful hardware - from blitters and HAM (an early memory efficient true-colour system) to pre-emptive multitasking, interprocess scripting, and a just plain elegant (Workbench 2 onwards) GUI.
So what went wrong? Answer: They started building PCs. Suddenly they were trying to get profits in a commodity marketplace. They controlled the Amiga market, but were just another player with PCs. Bankruptsy followed, and the world lost a good platform and the choices were reduced.
It's not even as if Apple's entry would be unique because Apple would introduce something new and wonderful. Apple would find their choices limited and controlled by Microsoft, which means other than a few aesthetic and reliability conscious choices, they'd be producing the same as everyone else. They'd also be up against pretty stiff competition - contrary to Apple-fan belief, Dell and Gateway are not the only manufacturers of PCs. IBM and Sony, to name but two in radically different markets, already have a reputation for elegant, original, high-quality PCs.
I think it's more likely Sony et al will pull out of the PC market than it is Apple will enter. And if Apple does enter, well the analysts will start to actually be telling the truth when they refer to the "beleaguered" computer maker...
if by some stretch of the imagination longhorn turns out to be nix based then it could be ported to the g5 (mac).
There were PowerPC and Alpha editions of Windows NT 4. With modern Windows, it can be done. The problem is the time and effort Microsoft would need to spend porting everything, while Microsoft gets basically the same amount of revenue regardless of how much work they do.
I have to say that it would never have occurred to me that Apple's hardware would take that much getting used to. The big leap is the operating system. So while I'm sympathetic to people who'd like OS X on Intel just to be able to dip their toes in for $129 or so, I really don't understand this.
This threadstarter is certainly thinking different!
What would hurt Apple more in the long run? An Apple computer running Windows or a PC running the mac OS?
And vice versa what would benefit Apple more in the long run?
My first reaction is that it would be far worse to have a mac principally running Windows. But that is just me.
I have never bought into the argument that Apple is a hardware company. They are a full widget company. Machines and software are one and the same. The experience is not complete without both at the same time. The whole widget is well thought out and designed as one.
The mac OS belongs on the mac and the mac should principally be designed for the mac OS .
For some reason, the nix users using the mac don't bother me.
The original poster's main wish, I suspect, is for a PC case and peripherals with the fit-and-finish that Macs have.
With all the custom case manufacturers out there, it's a sad commontary that we are only left with the choice between beige boxes and illuminated hot rod cases that look like they're from an episode of the Outer Limits.
putting the apple on a computer that runs windows only, would be like buying a dell.
have you thought about why you like the Apple logo? the first answer is wrong.
i'm going to guess it's not JUST the way it looks...if dell were to do cool things with their OS (oh wait, they don't have one..) then you'd probably be saying the same thing about Dell's logo.
Are you really trying to say that you'd like it if Games ran in OS X just as they do in XP? (a hard project to over come, i might add)
I don't think it's a bad idea necessarily. Apple makes it profit on hardware, though the software lures people to the hardware. They make really good hardware. Mac fanatics might stay with the OS. Others tied to the wintel platform might spend some money on Apple
However one of the biggest strengths of Apple is its strong corporate brand and verticle integration. Selling an xp mac would definitly be seen as diluting the brand or "giving up". Diluting the brand might not mean that much to us but it means a lot to the corporate types.
Why would they want to. They are already making profits and have been even through bad economic times.
The old story is that they would gain market share, and what? the same amount of profit; whoopee. With the market share they can tell everyone how wonderful they are. They already make money and continue to...
I don't think you've caught on...but THE WHOLE POINT OF HAVING A MAC IS TO HAVE THE STABILITY AND ELEGANCE OF MAC OS X!
Case closed.
First, I DO NOT think Apple should make a Windows PC. Yet, if Apple ever decided to make one, it would NOT be a MAC and would not be called a Macintosh. It would just be an elegantly designed Windows PC, and Apple would call it something else. A different variety of Apple?
In my opinion this would be a waste of engineering talent, and risk some misinterpretations by the public. Not worth it.
Comments
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
Worst. Thread. Ever.
You just got my vote for creator of the worst thread ever, and Governor of California.
"Why is anyone replying?" <- Was my original thought.
Originally posted by satchmo
For these rare (hopefully less and less) instances, it looks like we might need software emulation afterall.
Suppose it ran both Windows and OS x. Didn't apple make a performa that had a built in DOS card years ago? The idea is obviously to give business customers a crutch, should they make the switch. I don't know how bad it is, but it seems that halfway solutions almost always fail.
Apple make good computers, they use good components etc. They just happen to be based around a PPC instruction set. If you want to run windows on your Mac, then write a nice letter to MS and ASK them to compile you a Apple / PPC version of windows.
Remember, Operating systems are designed to run on various hardware. NOT the other way round. Thus, the decision of which hardware you buy is based on which OS you think will give you the best features for your needs.
There are plenty of very good, very well designed Wintel machines around. Remember You are not going to find these machines at your local PC World / Walmart. These companies are interested in 1 thing only... the Sale!!! The quality of components comes second only to how much markup they can make on a particular brand.
The best advise is to make your own!! get onto Google and hunt down the components and reviews on the quality if these components...
Here is a start, Crucial RAM, MSI Gfx cards (nVidia / ATI chipsets) ABIT mobo's (Intel / nVidia chipsets), Maxtor HDs. etc...
These are based on continuous reviews of good quality... Not the fastest or newest! It is possible to build a "PC" as good as quality as a Mac, but you will always ruin is by running windows!!!
Edit:
An even better idea would be to write a letter of complaint to the manufacturer of DVD's stating that there are many cross platform multimetia applications (Flash / Shockwave), Java etc, and that you are very dissapointed with them and would have to take this into consideration before buying their products again.
If we all just sit here moaning on forums, these companies are never going to support OSX
So what went wrong? Answer: They started building PCs. Suddenly they were trying to get profits in a commodity marketplace. They controlled the Amiga market, but were just another player with PCs. Bankruptsy followed, and the world lost a good platform and the choices were reduced.
It's not even as if Apple's entry would be unique because Apple would introduce something new and wonderful. Apple would find their choices limited and controlled by Microsoft, which means other than a few aesthetic and reliability conscious choices, they'd be producing the same as everyone else. They'd also be up against pretty stiff competition - contrary to Apple-fan belief, Dell and Gateway are not the only manufacturers of PCs. IBM and Sony, to name but two in radically different markets, already have a reputation for elegant, original, high-quality PCs.
I think it's more likely Sony et al will pull out of the PC market than it is Apple will enter. And if Apple does enter, well the analysts will start to actually be telling the truth when they refer to the "beleaguered" computer maker...
Originally posted by M.O.S.T
So is this going to have a ADM chip or Intel?
or are you going to convince Microsoft XP to support the G5 chip?
if by some stretch of the imagination longhorn turns out to be nix based then it could be ported to the g5 (mac).
Originally posted by AsLan^
if by some stretch of the imagination longhorn turns out to be nix based then it could be ported to the g5 (mac).
There were PowerPC and Alpha editions of Windows NT 4. With modern Windows, it can be done. The problem is the time and effort Microsoft would need to spend porting everything, while Microsoft gets basically the same amount of revenue regardless of how much work they do.
Barto
Originally posted by M.O.S.T
So is this going to have a ADM chip or Intel?
Since when are CPUs made out of corn syrup?
I have to say that it would never have occurred to me that Apple's hardware would take that much getting used to. The big leap is the operating system. So while I'm sympathetic to people who'd like OS X on Intel just to be able to dip their toes in for $129 or so, I really don't understand this.
What would hurt Apple more in the long run? An Apple computer running Windows or a PC running the mac OS?
And vice versa what would benefit Apple more in the long run?
My first reaction is that it would be far worse to have a mac principally running Windows. But that is just me.
I have never bought into the argument that Apple is a hardware company. They are a full widget company. Machines and software are one and the same. The experience is not complete without both at the same time. The whole widget is well thought out and designed as one.
The mac OS belongs on the mac and the mac should principally be designed for the mac OS .
For some reason, the nix users using the mac don't bother me.
With all the custom case manufacturers out there, it's a sad commontary that we are only left with the choice between beige boxes and illuminated hot rod cases that look like they're from an episode of the Outer Limits.
************************
putting the apple on a computer that runs windows only, would be like buying a dell.
have you thought about why you like the Apple logo? the first answer is wrong.
i'm going to guess it's not JUST the way it looks...if dell were to do cool things with their OS (oh wait, they don't have one..) then you'd probably be saying the same thing about Dell's logo.
Are you really trying to say that you'd like it if Games ran in OS X just as they do in XP? (a hard project to over come, i might add)
-walloo.
Originally posted by pscates
...and quite a few concert DVDs (Ms. Crow, Benatar, etc.) .
That's the funniest thing I've read on this thread.
However one of the biggest strengths of Apple is its strong corporate brand and verticle integration. Selling an xp mac would definitly be seen as diluting the brand or "giving up". Diluting the brand might not mean that much to us but it means a lot to the corporate types.
The old story is that they would gain market share, and what? the same amount of profit; whoopee. With the market share they can tell everyone how wonderful they are. They already make money and continue to...
Case closed.
Originally posted by Placebo
I don't think you've caught on...but THE WHOLE POINT OF HAVING A MAC IS TO HAVE THE STABILITY AND ELEGANCE OF MAC OS X!
Case closed.
First, I DO NOT think Apple should make a Windows PC. Yet, if Apple ever decided to make one, it would NOT be a MAC and would not be called a Macintosh. It would just be an elegantly designed Windows PC, and Apple would call it something else. A different variety of Apple?
In my opinion this would be a waste of engineering talent, and risk some misinterpretations by the public. Not worth it.
hhhmmm