Query failed: connection to localhost:9312 failed (errno=111, msg=Connection refused). 10.5 + Windows Emulation + Intel Chips - Future Apple Hardware Discussions on AppleInsider Forums Toggle navigation All Forums Recent Posts Sign In 10.5 + Windows Emulation + Intel Chips icfireball Posted: June 6, 2005 7:35PM in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014 I think 10.5, "Leopard" will have some sort of feature to emulate windows software on an mac, it esp. makes sense because of the switch to intel.Just puttin the idea out there «1234»Comments Reply 1 of 70 kickaha Posts: 8,760member June 6, 2005 7:42PM They may roll in something like WINE, or, just let the open source community take the ire of MS and stay clean of the whole affair... I suggest the latter."You say people can run Windows software on their Macs and it works just fine? And it's cannibalizing sales of Windows the OS? Gee Bill, I don't know what to tell you... *chuckle*" Reply 2 of 70 wmf Posts: 1,164member June 6, 2005 7:52PM Hold on, I'm getting a vision from beyond... it's an operating system... that kicks ass... and it runs Windows apps... it's OS/2... noooooooooooooooo... Reply 3 of 70 kwsanders Posts: 327member June 6, 2005 8:01PM Quote:Originally posted by wmf Hold on, I'm getting a vision from beyond... it's an operating system... that kicks ass... and it runs Windows apps... it's OS/2... noooooooooooooooo... Been there. Done that. Shoot me now. Reply 4 of 70 kickaha Posts: 8,760member June 6, 2005 8:08PM LOL Good point. I'm just sayin'... it's not all terrible. Look at it this way... it'll definitely be interesting. Who wants to live in boring times? Reply 5 of 70 gameguy56 Posts: 28member June 6, 2005 8:10PM This whole transitions reeks of what happened to NeXT and OS/2 Reply 6 of 70 1337_5l4xx0r Posts: 1,558member June 7, 2005 12:40AM Except Apple is established in the industry and has an installed user base that far exceeds OS2 or Next Reply 7 of 70 powerdoc Posts: 8,123member June 7, 2005 12:48AM Quote:Originally posted by Kickaha LOL Good point. I'm just sayin'... it's not all terrible. Look at it this way... it'll definitely be interesting. Who wants to live in boring times? Yes, this is very exciting, and will provide tons of discussions on Apple rumor sites Reply 8 of 70 spyder Posts: 170member June 7, 2005 12:53AM What's WINE? Reply 9 of 70 inaka Posts: 29member June 7, 2005 12:59AM Quote:Originally posted by 1337_5L4Xx0R Except Apple is established in the industry and has an installed user base that far exceeds OS2 or Next For now... Reply 10 of 70 kickaha Posts: 8,760member June 7, 2005 1:16AM Quote:Originally posted by spyder What's WINE? What you get with your cheese.Sorry, that's *whine*... lotta confusion over that recently around here.WINE = WINE Is Not an Emulator. It's a way of running Windows applications under Linux on x86 boxes. It's not an emulator, because it runs the code natively, it just pretends to be the Windows libraries, to let the app run.In other words, MacOS X/Intel + WINE = no need for Virtual PC. Run your Windows apps without having to incur the security cost of running the Windows OS. Reply 11 of 70 chevaliermalfet Posts: 470member June 7, 2005 2:02AM Actually, while I expect Apple won't promote running Windows on their boxes, I do expect them to promote WINE. Software like FCP, DVDSP, iPhoto, iDVD, etc. and Apple's overall hardware/software design will be their brand differentiation. the ability to either preserve your Windows software licenses or use software otherwise not in the Apple library will be a "brand benefit."And don't think for a moment that if I had a choice between running software in WINE or running a Mac port (or better a Mac native alternative), I wouldn't jump at that chance. While Windows software in WINE may be speedy on native hardware, it won't be nearly as elegant or as trouble free a solution as native software. I suspect Apple and their developers understand this about their client base; the developers that have to worry are the ones that don't give much thought to the user experience anyway. Reply 12 of 70 chagi Posts: 284member June 7, 2005 2:34AM I'm very curious to see how Windows will be implemented on the Mac platform once the models featuring Intel chips are launched.Basically I see two possibilities:- some form of dual boot ability (not very elegant at all)- Microsoft putting out a new version of VirtualPC that won't be burdened (as much) by the need for emulationI'm not a programmer, so I can't comment on exactly how realistic the latter is, as well as what would be involved, but I would personally prefer to see Windows running within a window on MacOS, rather than the dual boot route... Reply 13 of 70 kickaha Posts: 8,760member June 7, 2005 2:47AM WINE WINE WINERun the apps, forget the OS. No 'in a window' crap. Just the apps. Reply 14 of 70 telomar Posts: 1,804member June 7, 2005 2:49AM Quote:Originally posted by ChevalierMalFet Actually, while I expect Apple won't promote running Windows on their boxes They've already said their boxes will be able to be dual boot with Windows, although other PCs won't be able to use OS X. Reply 15 of 70 chevaliermalfet Posts: 470member June 7, 2005 3:19AM They've actually outright stated this? I gathered from the SteveNote coverage that they wouldn't be hindering it, but they wouldn't be supporting it either. I read that as "yeah you could hack it, but you better know what you are doing." Reply 16 of 70 midgcool Posts: 19member June 7, 2005 4:52AM have you used wine...its awfull...getting stuff to work is nigh on impossible, but maybe thats just because its linux.. Reply 17 of 70 jbl Posts: 555member June 7, 2005 5:08AM Quote:Originally posted by gameguy56 This whole transitions reeks of what happened to NeXT and OS/2 I agree. The difference is that Apple decided to announce the transition a year in advance so they will not have to bother selling any Macs for the next year. I mean, how much software or hardware are you going to buy for a platform that is only going to be around for another year? By the time they do start selling Mactels they are going to be the iPod company, breaking into the computer business starting with a market share of zero.Sorry for being a bit cynical. Reply 18 of 70 @homenow Posts: 998member June 7, 2005 6:18AM Apple was supposidly working on Windows in OS X back in the Rhapsody days, before it was called OS X in the form of Red Box. I wouldnt be supprised if they have it in pretty good working order now. The biggest problem I see with it is Apple trying to get developers to continue to develop for OS X if it also runs Windows applications nativly, it would be easier and less expensive for them to keep one code base and do one set of beta testing to market their software. This was a major problem with OS/2, it ran Windows better than Windows so no one developed native applications for it.Apple does have a good install base, and a good number of developers. If they can push the developers, and the transitioin for them is smooth enough to have their products ready for the launch of the new platform then they might make it work. Hopefully they have a fallback plan to release these systems early if sales tank too much too quickly. But Apple is still going to have to sell developers on writing their programs natively for OS X, and for the short term maintaining both a PowerPC version and an MacTel version of their code. This might be part of Rosetta as well, so that developers can still reach the "legacy" install base of PowerPC Macs with their updated Mactel programs.I don't think that Microsoft will play along with Office, but the transition timeliine suggests to me that the first version will be a Tiger release, which would not include "Red Box". Apple could use this to their advantage to convice Adobe and other developers to rework their code, then come out with "Red Box", maybe as part of an update to Rosetta, in thier release of Leopard in 2 years to complete the transition.The Ace in Apple's hand is in their software. The iLife programs should be ready, and that would be ready for the consumer release. More important are their professional applications, like FileMaker and Final Cut. One thing for sure though, Apple needs Adobe on board. Since they didn't have Adobe's CEO up there showcasing an updated PhotoShop I don't think that they do right now. This is even more important since Adobe bought Macromedia. Reply 19 of 70 chevaliermalfet Posts: 470member June 7, 2005 6:47AM I think the NeXT?OS/2 analogy is overly simplistic; if only because we don't have enough details about Apple's business model, once Nipple pushes forward.Given Apple's history (and Steve's, quite frankly), the OSintel X business model will mean custom chipsets on the motherboard, encrypted ROMs, and an EULA that prohibits installation on uncircumsized hardware.OS/2 ran on unaltered Wintel hardware, so you can kick that right out as an analogy (also, unknown software only brand differentiation; no immediately obvious advantages, little/no software unique to the OS). And of course the nail in the coffin, fairly small user base, effectively.NeXt is the much better analogy, in that while it also eventually ran on unaltered Wintel hardware, they had better known software differentiation, immediately obvious advantages (if swiftly declining), and software unique to the OS (the first web browser was invented on NeXT, display postscript, etc.). Of course NeXt also never really gained a large user base before they transitioned to software, and you can argue that they were done as a mass market OS well before they stopped manufacturing hardware.But really the biggest oversight is it's all down to execution. Can Steve pull this off pissing off as few people as possible. I suspect he can; yesterday's keynote was a very good start, and was very well managed. He showed the developers, that unlike the 68k to PPC transition, they've got developer tools in place, which I'm sure is at the least a huge relief. Notice how the crowd's enthusiasm seemed to change as soon as Steve started communicating that they knew about this eventuality and had planned for it.Anyone else find it ironic that the 68k-PPC transition launched Metroworks CodeWarrior, and the PPC-Intel transition will sink it?For Mac OS X, anyway. Reply 20 of 70 junkyard dawg Posts: 2,801member June 7, 2005 7:40AM Quote:Originally posted by Telomar They've already said their boxes will be able to be dual boot with Windows, although other PCs won't be able to use OS X. Macs will support Windows? Ugggghh, that's a new one. 'Scuse me while I go vomit up another kidney., «1234» Sign In or Register to comment.