Expectations For Intel Macs

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Well, there is a thread for how the new Macs will look. Also, reasons for going with Intel have be discussed. Still, I'm wondering about new features the Intel Macs may offer, features that are related to the CPU change? Many appear to think we will not see much difference other than typical changes found in new models of the Mac. I think otherwise and expect one or two surprises in this move to Intel. Then again, if we figure it out beforehand these will not be surprises.



I'll toss one out for starters. This idea is so obvious that it must have been discussed already, somewhere. This idea comes from two facts. First, that Intel Macs will not run Classic mode. Classic is officially dead on new Intel Mac, a fact that is obviously to most who understands a little about how computers work. Second, it is very possible, even likely, that the new Macs will boot Windows OS, though Apple will not support Windows booting.



Now consider how classic worked when OS X came out. There was a copy of OS 9 on the Mac, and OS X could run this as a Unix process without actually booting into OS 9. Double click on an old Classic application and voila, there is the OS 9 desktop showing the application. It works instantly and seamlessly. It works not just because Apple developed Classic mode, but because OS 9 runs on the same PPC processor as OS X.



Now we have an Intel CPU. What is to prevent Apple from developing a Windows mode that will run a copy of Windows as an OS X process? My computer knowledge is far from complete and I may be overlooking something obvious. There is a huge advantage to doing it this way. First, it is instantaneous and seamless. Second, there is no need to support Window OS on the hardware. It is simply running as a process.



So that is the idea. Just to add some worthless rumors to this, an "Apple Rep" let it slip to a CompUSA manager that the new Intel Macs will all have Windows installed. I though this to be rather unlikely until I got the idea for a Windows mode. Could MS have cut a deal with Apple to provide a copy of Windows that would not boot? Apple may have gotten it pretty cheap, maybe in exchange for agreeing to prevent OS X from booting on generic PCs?



Any thought? Please give technical details if you shoot down my idea. I like to learn as much as I can.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 46
    stustanleystustanley Posts: 236member
    the only problem i would see with it is that developers would stop developing for osx.



    Why develop for theplatform is the windows version we have working works just as well?



    i think the same thing happened with the NeXt system! (please correct me if i am wrong)



    stu
  • Reply 2 of 46
    slugheadslughead Posts: 1,169member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by snoopy

    What is to prevent Apple from developing a Windows mode that will run a copy of Windows as an OS X process?



    The fact that Apple would have to bundle a copy with windows with every OSX version.



    Virtual PC on Macintel will be almost as fast as booting directly into windows.



    And btw, the way Apple's doing this, all it's going to do is give developers a tough time for a few months and allow windows to run on a mac.



    Most people (AKA the smart ones) don't buy macs for the hardware, so the likelyhood of someone buying a mac to use windows is really remote and laughable.
  • Reply 3 of 46
    mynameheremynamehere Posts: 560member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by stustanley



    i think the same thing happened with the NeXt system! (please correct me if i am wrong)





    IBM's OS/2 as well...just couldn't compete with Windows.
  • Reply 4 of 46
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    There is no need for Virtual PC to run Windows on Intel Macs, since no emulation is needed. Something similar to the Classic mode but designed to run Windows in an OS X process will do the job. A very good point is made that Microsoft may be the best one to provide this application, rather than Apple.



    Whether or not a Windows mode would be on all Intel Macs is debatable. I could see Apple including it if Microsoft prices it right. From MS viewpoint, it could be very profitable to sell cheap to put a copy on every Mac. Also, no marketing costs or trying to get people to buy it. From Apple's point of view, it would be one heck of a selling point. Are you switching from a Windows PC? No problem. All your Windows software will run on your new Mac. Also, it would be a real selling point for business.



    One technical point I wonder about is whether a Windows mode would work with a copy of Windows that does not boot. If so, it would seem to guard against piracy since the Windows code could not be installed as an OS on a generic PC. As a result, MS may be more receptive to providing Windows mode at a low price.
  • Reply 5 of 46
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    Deleted
  • Reply 6 of 46
    slugheadslughead Posts: 1,169member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by snoopy

    There is no need for Virtual PC to run Windows on Intel Macs, since no emulation is needed.



    I knew that, I was just trying to simplify things



    M$ would never cooperate in including a Windows environment to run along side OS X.. that's just setting themselves up for a coup.



    maybe M$ will finally just say "ok F-this" and buy apple



    maybe we'll finally see a 3ghz G5
  • Reply 7 of 46
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by stustanley

    the only problem i would see with it is that developers would stop developing for osx.



    Why develop for theplatform is the windows version we have working works just as well? . . .









    Well, Apple is stuck with this situation whether or not there is a Windows mode on every Mac. Such an application will exist sooner or later. By having an Intel processor, new Macs will be able to run Windows applications in OS X very fast. I'm sure someone with technical savvy can offer a good guess. My uneducated guess is 70 or 80 percent of the speed running in a Windows booted PC.



    Apple must have taken this fact into account before deciding to transition to Intel. It is much too obvious for the folks at Apple to overlook.
  • Reply 8 of 46
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by slughead





    , , , M$ would never cooperate in including a Windows environment to run along side OS X.. that's just setting themselves up for a coup. . .









    Why not? Microsoft provides VPC now. The only difference is that Windows will run better on the new Intel Mac. MS would likely look on this as an advantage, or opportunity. If Windows were to run on every Mac, the percentage of PCs that run Windows applications will be higher. It also exposes all Mac users to Windows. (Thought many may just ignore it.) If given enough thought I'm sure most of us could see ways that MS might consider Windows on all Macs to be an advantage. If nothing else, there is the fee MS would collect from Apple, even if it is small.
  • Reply 9 of 46
    ensoniqensoniq Posts: 129member
    Snoopy is correct...there is NO downside for Microsoft in developing a better VPC for use on the Intel Macs.



    They already sell Virtual PC for Mac, which lets Windows (and other x86 OSes) run under Mac OS X. They also sell Virtual PC for Windows, which lets Windows machines run multiple x86 OSes under Windows XP/2000.



    So Microsoft has a front end that is designed for Mac users (VPC Mac) and a back end that knows perfectly well how to talk to an x86 machine (VPC Windows), and once they combine the best parts of both those programs into one, we should have a very good VPC Mac for Intel that will actually be quite speedy and usable.



    Every time Microsoft sells VPC and a copy of Windows, they make money. They own the majority of the OS market. It would take years of Windows users getting exposed to Mac OS X and switching before they would have any worry that the loss of business would even cost them a tiny percentage of the billions they make each year. So far that hasn't happened, and Mac Intel machines will do almost nothing to change that.



    A Mac will still be a Mac to an average customer, a Wintel will be a Wintel, and the processor in the Mac isn't going to change almost anyone's mind into switching. That is a fallacy. The only reason a PC user would switch to a Mac would be to run OS X, not to run Windows on a cool looking machine.



    Windows on a Mac won't hurt Apple, as people who buy Macs do so because of the OS, the ease of use, and because they know enough to know it's a good machine with a long life. If they need to run Windows too, they willl buy VPC and Windows and that will help Microsoft. Expect the next version of VPC (for Intel Macs) to be the best ever.



    -- Ensoniq
  • Reply 10 of 46
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    It's easy to assume that Windows will run on future Macs like it does now but much faster -- MS will sell VPC for Intel Macs. I guess the point I've wanted to make is that things may be a little, or a lot, different. VPC is just one possibility. The name may change because, as I understand it, there will be nothing "virtual" about the PC that is running Windows applications. Here are a couple options for new Macs that come to mind.



    1) Apple provides the basic application that will run Windows OS as an OS X process. It would be in the Systems Preferences menu in place of Classic. It would be up to the user to provide a copy of Windows OS to make this work.



    2) Microsoft provides the application rather than Apple and packages it with a copy of Windows. Emulation code is no longer needed, so it should be a simpler application and priced accordingly, lower than VPC.



    Whether or not an operational Windows mode would be on all Intel Macs is debatable. I think it is unlikely myself, but it is interesting to think about. It is also just crazy enough that Apple might do it, providing MS comes across with a very good deal.
  • Reply 11 of 46
    tacojohntacojohn Posts: 980member
    It would be cool if someone developed an application that could see a separate partition and could boot the version of windows that's installed on that partition- kinda like VPC, but if you wanted to you could also dual boot and run windows natively without running OS X.



    If you needed to jump into windows really quick and grab something or check something you could run it within OS X with reasonable speed. Then if you needed to run something that requires a lot of system resources (game, 3Dsmax, etc.) you could boot into windows without OS X.
  • Reply 12 of 46
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by tacojohn

    It would be cool if someone developed an application that could see a separate partition and could boot the version of windows that's installed on that partition- kinda like VPC, but if you wanted to you could also dual boot and run windows natively without running OS X.



    If you needed to jump into windows really quick and grab something or check something you could run it within OS X with reasonable speed. Then if you needed to run something that requires a lot of system resources (game, 3Dsmax, etc.) you could boot into windows without OS X.






    What you are saying seems to describe how OS 9 worked on Macs up to a couple years ago. OS 9 could be installed on a separate partition, which is how I have it on this one. The Mac could be booted into OS 9, or OS 9 could be run in Classic mode. I see no reason it might not work exactly like this with Windows on Intel Macs. One difference, Apple said it would not support Windows booting, but it may work fine anyway.
  • Reply 13 of 46
    big macbig mac Posts: 480member
    Come on, all of this is patently ridiculous. A Windows VM installed by default on OS X would swiftly kill Mac software development. Developers could write against Win32 alone and be able to claim to have Mac support. And it would completely open Apple's PCs to the Windows world of malware. The average user would not care, as long as his or her applications would run properly. Apple (presumably) has more sense than to allow Microsoft to completely eat its lunch.
  • Reply 14 of 46
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Big Mac

    Come on, all of this is patently ridiculous. A Windows VM installed by default on OS X would swiftly kill Mac software development. Developers could write against Win32 alone and be able to claim to have Mac support. . .





    I did say, "I think it is unlikely myself, but it is interesting to think about." I think the key words you used are "installed by default." I concede this point. However, Apple could still have a Windows mode in the System Preference in OS X. It would, however, require that the user install a copy of Windows OS to make it work.
  • Reply 15 of 46
    aplnubaplnub Posts: 2,590member
    I expect to have a fast version of VPC that will run AutoCad and MS Frontpage without me having to reboot. If MS can do that, then I get a intel powermac and intel powerbook at work. What a dream I am having...
  • Reply 16 of 46
    xoraxaxxoraxax Posts: 9member
    Most likely scenario IMHO: There will be no Apple-developed Windows mode in OS X. Microsoft will sell a version of VPC with Mactel support. It will perform at a speed comparable to VPC running on Windows, a respectable improvement over the PPC version.



    Yes, Microsoft does make a VPC for Windows. I use it frequently in my evil alter ego as a Windows developer.
  • Reply 17 of 46
    scepticsceptic Posts: 37member
    The doomsday scenario for Apple is Pear PC type emulation running Mac OSX within WINDOWS on non-Apple machines.



    Pear PC type "sand box" emulation is next to impossible to prevent. While you may not be able to run OSX standalone on a Dell, you will almost certainly be able to run it in a sandbox.



    Picture this.



    $999 3.5 ghz Dell P4, running OSX in a sandbox at 90% speed



    OR



    $999 2.5 ghz Mac P4, running OSX natively



    This is what Apple should be concerned about.
  • Reply 18 of 46
    blackcatblackcat Posts: 697member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by snoopy

    There is no need for Virtual PC to run Windows on Intel Macs, since no emulation is needed.



    We don't know that yet. VPC does more than emulate an x86, it emulates an entire PC including RAM, BIOS, ports etc. While we know the dev Macs are just PCs running a custom OSX we don't know if the production Macs will have custom Apple parts.



    Allowing Windows to boot does not mean supporting it, which also means some Macs might not boot it. People will whine if, say, Minis can't but iMacs can but it's not upto Apple to make it possible.



    I like the idea of VPC on Intel Macs as it means no rebooting. Windows sits in its own window while OS X carries on doing its thing, both at full speed.
  • Reply 19 of 46
    Quote:

    Originally posted by mynamehere

    IBM's OS/2 as well...just couldn't compete with Windows.



    Didn't IBM market OS2 as being able to run Windows programs better than Windows? I do miss OS2
  • Reply 20 of 46
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Sceptic

    Pear PC type "sand box" emulation is next to impossible to prevent. While you may not be able to run OSX standalone on a Dell, you will almost certainly be able to run it in a sandbox.





    The sandbox of choice would be VMWare. Although, it seems like somebody will have to produce a hack to have the sandbox look like a Mac. Isn't Apple going to use some type of DRM to prevent OSX from running on non-Apple hardware?
Sign In or Register to comment.