That's why things like VPC should do a good trade.
Possibly - I only know one person who owns VPC. I know it's slow at the moment (so instead of Mac users buying PCs and Macs they could just run both). I can see this argument but... neh!
It's slow because it's emulating an entire architecture. The moment it runs on x86, it will stop emulating that architecture and the extra cycles will make it snappier. Hopefully.
It's slow because it's emulating an entire architecture.
Yeah I know - i just think that people who are switching will want to get away from Windows as much as possible! My best friend wanted a Mac - got given a Dell (I think her Dad wanted to spite me!). The point is when she buys a Mac she will lose OneNote but wont want to buy MS Windows to run it. She's trying to leave the windows world. It would make no sense to switch and use both. It would be complicated for most users. Remember most users struggle with one computer - let alone two on the same hard disk!
It's slow because it's emulating an entire architecture. The moment it runs on x86, it will stop emulating that architecture and the extra cycles will make it snappier. Hopefully.
Exactly Gene.
Microsoft already makes Virtual PC for Windows. This allows Windows customers to run other OSes on their Intel machines WITHOUT dual-booting, which requires hard disk partitioning and other crap that non-techies don't want to deal with. The speed of VPC on a Windows machine is at least 90% of the primary OS, because it's already running on Intel with no PPC to Intel translation.
The average switcher to a MacIntel box from a WinTel box has no interest in true dual-boot functionality. They just want to be able to run Windows software on their new Mac. Virtual PC for Mac on Intel will let them do so from inside Mac OS X, at nearly full speed of what dual-boot would allow, without other dual-boot issues and hassles. If Microsoft wants to sell a lot more copies of VPC and Windows to Mac users, they will do their best to make sure VPC on MacIntel absolutely flies on performance. They don't care WHERE you run Windows or how, as long as they get your dollars.
If windows runs on the "new" mac, why wouldn't the "ported" osx run on a windows machine?
Why not buy a pc and run osx on it?
How are they going to solve that, when you see the price difference between apple and pc computers?
windows don't make hardware so don't care what computer you run it on. Secondly Apple will put a restriction in the OS so that it can't be run (easily) on Intel PCs.
I wouldn't hold your breath. I have spoke with AutoDesk about this many times and they have repeatedly said, they have no plans. Take that for what it is worth.
If they were to release a version of AutoCad for intel Mac's, I would completely trash my PPC Mac's and purchase 3 new intel mac's IMMEDIATELY.
I would probably camp out on Steve's driveway entrance until he provided me with a dual core power book, double dual-core power mac, and a sweet dual core imac (all of these intel of course).
Having a MAC that can do both OS's is a good thing, not a bad thing. They will be much easier to get into the work place.
I totally agree. I don't really want a dual boot if I can run VPC.
Quote:
Originally posted by Ensoniq
Exactly Gene.
Microsoft already makes Virtual PC for Windows. This allows Windows customers to run other OSes on their Intel machines WITHOUT dual-booting, which requires hard disk partitioning and other crap that non-techies don't want to deal with. The speed of VPC on a Windows machine is at least 90% of the primary OS, because it's already running on Intel with no PPC to Intel translation.
The average switcher to a MacIntel box from a WinTel box has no interest in true dual-boot functionality. They just want to be able to run Windows software on their new Mac. Virtual PC for Mac on Intel will let them do so from inside Mac OS X, at nearly full speed of what dual-boot would allow, without other dual-boot issues and hassles. If Microsoft wants to sell a lot more copies of VPC and Windows to Mac users, they will do their best to make sure VPC on MacIntel absolutely flies on performance. They don't care WHERE you run Windows or how, as long as they get your dollars.
My best friend wanted a Mac - got given a Dell (I think her Dad wanted to spite me!). The point is when she buys a Mac she will lose OneNote but wont want to buy MS Windows to run it.
Isn't OneNote a part of MS Office 2004 for Mac? If not, there are plenty of replacements in that category of software by now. There will be for IntelMac as well.
She won't ever have to dual boot unless she needs something far more specialized, but her father will have a nice warm fuzzy feeling knowing that she could boot into Windows if she wanted to...
Having a MAC that can do both OS's is a good thing, not a bad thing. They will be much easier to get into the work place.
Won't this open up the computer to viri? Having a Mac be bootable in Windows means that all the crap people want to switch away from will still be there. Here's a question - if someone has a dual-boot Mac with Windows on it, and in using Windows gets a virus; then reboots in Mac, will the Mac side be negatively affected at all?
Won't this open up the computer to viri? Having a Mac be bootable in Windows means that all the crap people want to switch away from will still be there. Here's a question - if someone has a dual-boot Mac with Windows on it, and in using Windows gets a virus; then reboots in Mac, will the Mac side be negatively affected at all?
If you partition it then you should be OK. The virus' shouldn't affect the Mac OS Extended Format. BUT I could be wrong. The best thing to do is to isolate the Windows OS so it doesn't have access to the Mac OS volume (and can't format it)or not run windows!
I repeat, why would anyone "want" to run Windows?!?!?
Personally, the front end control software to a lot of installed embedded processor equipment will only ever run on Windows. At present I use VPC running on my Powerbook to interface to these via a USB to RS232 interface. It works but feedback (meters etc.) is slow. A 'native' VPC would solve a lot of problems and I can't tell how many people in the Industrial/Installation/AV markets would by Powerbooks if they knew they could run Windows on those occasions that it is neccessary. Similarly I run Vectorworks for CAD which is a great program, but AutoCad is the lingua franca. Being able to check the .dwg output of Vectorworks in a native AutoCad lite would be a godsend.
I don't think I am alone in the area between design and industry where many people would prefer to use a Macintosh but have to use Windows for certain peocesses. I personally know about twenty.
Personally, the front end control software to a lot of installed embedded processor equipment will only ever run on Windows. At present I use VPC running on my Powerbook to interface to these via a USB to RS232 interface. It works but feedback (meters etc.) is slow. A 'native' VPC would solve a lot of problems and I can't tell how many people in the Industrial/Installation/AV markets would by Powerbooks if they knew they could run Windows on those occasions that it is neccessary. Similarly I run Vectorworks for CAD which is a great program, but AutoCad is the lingua franca. Being able to check the .dwg output of Vectorworks in a native AutoCad lite would be a godsend.
I don't think I am alone in the area between design and industry where many people would prefer to use a Macintosh but have to use Windows for certain peocesses. I personally know about twenty.
BUT you still don't WANT to run Windows - just have to!
Won't this open up the computer to viri? Having a Mac be bootable in Windows means that all the crap people want to switch away from will still be there. Here's a question - if someone has a dual-boot Mac with Windows on it, and in using Windows gets a virus; then reboots in Mac, will the Mac side be negatively affected at all?
It'd be funny if the biggest Virus threat for Mac OS is a Windows virus that attacks Mac OS if you have a dual-boot MacIntel mac.
Comments
Originally posted by MacCrazy
But then they wouldn't be escaping any of the things they are switching for and they also would need to restart it constantly (if it's dual-boot).
That's why things like VPC should do a good trade.
Originally posted by Telomar
That's why things like VPC should do a good trade.
Possibly - I only know one person who owns VPC. I know it's slow at the moment (so instead of Mac users buying PCs and Macs they could just run both). I can see this argument but... neh!
Originally posted by Gene Clean
It's slow because it's emulating an entire architecture.
Yeah I know - i just think that people who are switching will want to get away from Windows as much as possible! My best friend wanted a Mac - got given a Dell (I think her Dad wanted to spite me!). The point is when she buys a Mac she will lose OneNote but wont want to buy MS Windows to run it. She's trying to leave the windows world. It would make no sense to switch and use both. It would be complicated for most users. Remember most users struggle with one computer - let alone two on the same hard disk!
Originally posted by Gene Clean
It's slow because it's emulating an entire architecture. The moment it runs on x86, it will stop emulating that architecture and the extra cycles will make it snappier. Hopefully.
Exactly Gene.
Microsoft already makes Virtual PC for Windows. This allows Windows customers to run other OSes on their Intel machines WITHOUT dual-booting, which requires hard disk partitioning and other crap that non-techies don't want to deal with. The speed of VPC on a Windows machine is at least 90% of the primary OS, because it's already running on Intel with no PPC to Intel translation.
The average switcher to a MacIntel box from a WinTel box has no interest in true dual-boot functionality. They just want to be able to run Windows software on their new Mac. Virtual PC for Mac on Intel will let them do so from inside Mac OS X, at nearly full speed of what dual-boot would allow, without other dual-boot issues and hassles. If Microsoft wants to sell a lot more copies of VPC and Windows to Mac users, they will do their best to make sure VPC on MacIntel absolutely flies on performance. They don't care WHERE you run Windows or how, as long as they get your dollars.
Why not buy a pc and run osx on it?
How are they going to solve that, when you see the price difference between apple and pc computers?
Originally posted by drazztikka
If windows runs on the "new" mac, why wouldn't the "ported" osx run on a windows machine?
Why not buy a pc and run osx on it?
How are they going to solve that, when you see the price difference between apple and pc computers?
windows don't make hardware so don't care what computer you run it on. Secondly Apple will put a restriction in the OS so that it can't be run (easily) on Intel PCs.
Originally posted by Thereubster
I believe AutoCad for OSX is coming anyway....
I wouldn't hold your breath. I have spoke with AutoDesk about this many times and they have repeatedly said, they have no plans. Take that for what it is worth.
If they were to release a version of AutoCad for intel Mac's, I would completely trash my PPC Mac's and purchase 3 new intel mac's IMMEDIATELY.
I would probably camp out on Steve's driveway entrance until he provided me with a dual core power book, double dual-core power mac, and a sweet dual core imac (all of these intel of course).
Having a MAC that can do both OS's is a good thing, not a bad thing. They will be much easier to get into the work place.
Originally posted by Ensoniq
Exactly Gene.
Microsoft already makes Virtual PC for Windows. This allows Windows customers to run other OSes on their Intel machines WITHOUT dual-booting, which requires hard disk partitioning and other crap that non-techies don't want to deal with. The speed of VPC on a Windows machine is at least 90% of the primary OS, because it's already running on Intel with no PPC to Intel translation.
The average switcher to a MacIntel box from a WinTel box has no interest in true dual-boot functionality. They just want to be able to run Windows software on their new Mac. Virtual PC for Mac on Intel will let them do so from inside Mac OS X, at nearly full speed of what dual-boot would allow, without other dual-boot issues and hassles. If Microsoft wants to sell a lot more copies of VPC and Windows to Mac users, they will do their best to make sure VPC on MacIntel absolutely flies on performance. They don't care WHERE you run Windows or how, as long as they get your dollars.
Originally posted by MacCrazy
My best friend wanted a Mac - got given a Dell (I think her Dad wanted to spite me!). The point is when she buys a Mac she will lose OneNote but wont want to buy MS Windows to run it.
Isn't OneNote a part of MS Office 2004 for Mac? If not, there are plenty of replacements in that category of software by now. There will be for IntelMac as well.
She won't ever have to dual boot unless she needs something far more specialized, but her father will have a nice warm fuzzy feeling knowing that she could boot into Windows if she wanted to...
Originally posted by aplnub
Having a MAC that can do both OS's is a good thing, not a bad thing. They will be much easier to get into the work place.
Won't this open up the computer to viri? Having a Mac be bootable in Windows means that all the crap people want to switch away from will still be there. Here's a question - if someone has a dual-boot Mac with Windows on it, and in using Windows gets a virus; then reboots in Mac, will the Mac side be negatively affected at all?
Originally posted by Engine Joe
Won't this open up the computer to viri? Having a Mac be bootable in Windows means that all the crap people want to switch away from will still be there. Here's a question - if someone has a dual-boot Mac with Windows on it, and in using Windows gets a virus; then reboots in Mac, will the Mac side be negatively affected at all?
If you partition it then you should be OK. The virus' shouldn't affect the Mac OS Extended Format. BUT I could be wrong. The best thing to do is to isolate the Windows OS so it doesn't have access to the Mac OS volume (and can't format it)or not run windows!
Originally posted by OBJRA10
I repeat, why would anyone "want" to run Windows?!?!?
That's what I've been saying. I try to avoid it.
Originally posted by OBJRA10
I repeat, why would anyone "want" to run Windows?!?!?
Personally, the front end control software to a lot of installed embedded processor equipment will only ever run on Windows. At present I use VPC running on my Powerbook to interface to these via a USB to RS232 interface. It works but feedback (meters etc.) is slow. A 'native' VPC would solve a lot of problems and I can't tell how many people in the Industrial/Installation/AV markets would by Powerbooks if they knew they could run Windows on those occasions that it is neccessary. Similarly I run Vectorworks for CAD which is a great program, but AutoCad is the lingua franca. Being able to check the .dwg output of Vectorworks in a native AutoCad lite would be a godsend.
I don't think I am alone in the area between design and industry where many people would prefer to use a Macintosh but have to use Windows for certain peocesses. I personally know about twenty.
Originally posted by vinney57
Personally, the front end control software to a lot of installed embedded processor equipment will only ever run on Windows. At present I use VPC running on my Powerbook to interface to these via a USB to RS232 interface. It works but feedback (meters etc.) is slow. A 'native' VPC would solve a lot of problems and I can't tell how many people in the Industrial/Installation/AV markets would by Powerbooks if they knew they could run Windows on those occasions that it is neccessary. Similarly I run Vectorworks for CAD which is a great program, but AutoCad is the lingua franca. Being able to check the .dwg output of Vectorworks in a native AutoCad lite would be a godsend.
I don't think I am alone in the area between design and industry where many people would prefer to use a Macintosh but have to use Windows for certain peocesses. I personally know about twenty.
BUT you still don't WANT to run Windows - just have to!
Originally posted by MacCrazy
BUT you still don't WANT to run Windows - just have to!
Yeah but I WANT to do my job. Windows capability would help enormously.
Originally posted by vinney57
Yeah but I WANT to do my job. Windows capability would help enormously.
No-one's disputing the need for Windows. We were just commenting that no-one wants to run Windows. They would rather their apps worked on Macs.
Originally posted by Engine Joe
Won't this open up the computer to viri? Having a Mac be bootable in Windows means that all the crap people want to switch away from will still be there. Here's a question - if someone has a dual-boot Mac with Windows on it, and in using Windows gets a virus; then reboots in Mac, will the Mac side be negatively affected at all?
It'd be funny if the biggest Virus threat for Mac OS is a Windows virus that attacks Mac OS if you have a dual-boot MacIntel mac.