Yes, Windows will ruin your computing experience just as fast as on a Dell.
Yes, Windows will run at 'full speed'. It will depend on the optimization of the GPU drivers, etc, but it appears from what little benchmarking I've seen that it isn't bad for the hardware being used.
I don't disagree but with apps that are critical to the viability of the platform it looks to me like Apple is willing to do the developement. Unlike MS I bet Apple would tolerate competition. But with boot camp they can't tolerate an adobe saying " we recognize that apple users can now boot into windows therfore we are going to concentrate all our efforts on win cs". Surely if we have discussed this senario here on these forums, it's been discuused at Apple. They surely have a contingency plan.
It's been discussed for years and years. I'm sure they discuss it at Apple on a periodic basis.
For those who dismiss it, and I'm not saying that you are, no developer would ever leave the Mac platform because of it.
That's wrong. We've seen developers leave the platform even without it!
The best hope here, and I'm sure that Apple is seeing it the same way, is that the growth of the platform will give impetus to developers to stay, and even have new ones join in. If Windows gives Apple a good number of new customers, and most of those who buy a Mac with the eventual idea of installing Windows, never do, then this will be good.
But Apple can't become a one stop shop all alone, with few other developers in competition. No matter how good Apple's programs can be, there will always be people who prefer working another way. If there is only one way on the Mac platform, then Apple will find that there is a limited base of customers to pull from.
Just like there are people who love InDesign, and hate Quark, there are those who love Quark, but hate Indesign. If one of those left the Mac platform, there would be many people who would go to Windows, because their favorite program was only to be found there.
Remember that computer platforms are only as good as the software running on them.
But, it's also better to have five programs that are pretty good, on a platform, than just one that's really good.
Okay, this all kind of hinges on a single point though...
Name the Mac developers that can tell their users "Oh well, we've decided to drop Mac support - just spend an additional $100-200 and then you can buy our Windows version on top of that...", and have them snap to and do it. I can't think of one. It'd be marketshare suicide for the app.
Heck, users bitch whine and moan about *regular* upgrade pricing - you think they're going to blow the money on a Windows license just to run an app? \
Like I said, it'd take every developer in an entire market segment ditching simultaneously to actually cause a problem, and I just don't see that happening. For every Adobe that might ditch, there are a couple other developers waiting in the wings, salivating at grabbing some of that marketshare.
Adobe for one. MS for two. There are plenty of others who have done so over the years. Most of the CAD industry. Financial, and others.
Many developers who have gone from being Mac shops over the years, to being Mac/PC shops have found most of their customers on Windows after a while. It's natural. There are twenty times as many people using Windows as Macs. Even if a much smaller percentage use the program, that is still more people.
Do you really think that if Adobe left the platform the industry would look for something else? No way. Same thing with Quark.
Smaller, more basic programs can always be remade by some other developer, but not the big complex ones that have been around for some time, and have industries built around them.
Users would leave to follow the software. When you are a company, or a pro, the cost of switching is minor.
It's been discussed for years and years. I'm sure they discuss it at Apple on a periodic basis.
For those who dismiss it, and I'm not saying that you are, no developer would ever leave the Mac platform because of it.
That's wrong. We've seen developers leave the platform even without it!
While I don't disagree with your reasoning per se, I think it's important to point out (if it already hasn't been) that in fiscal 2005, 25% of Adobe revenue came from the Mac platform... And that's primarily with CS and Acrobat, etc. on the Mac, whereas the Windows sales include products like Creative Solutions' business software and other products. While Adobe in the long term may be a wild card, at least for now Adobe gets quite a chunk of change for developing Mac software... and I don't think that's going to change anytime soon.
To Apple's credit if Adobe jumped ship what would happen is that everyone would update their software and likely see what would happen. I know people still, happily, using Photoshop 6 and Quark 4.
I think Apple would have 3 yrs to find a replacement or develop one. I'm not sure how losing Microsoft would affect Macs since Office is important but dual booting would allow you to at least run Office.
I envision a future where you run a plethora of applications on different OS and everything works together well with a little tweaking. The whole idea of a monolithic platform seems to be archaic and silly.
While I don't disagree with your reasoning per se, I think it's important to point out (if it already hasn't been) that in fiscal 2005, 25% of Adobe revenue came from the Mac platform... And that's primarily with CS and Acrobat, etc. on the Mac, whereas the Windows sales include products like Creative Solutions' business software and other products. While Adobe in the long term may be a wild card, at least for now Adobe gets quite a chunk of change for developing Mac software... and I don't think that's going to change anytime soon.
Yes, but Adobe has stated, publically, in interviews, and in their financial statement, that Apple users comprise 27% of CS2 users. That's a couple of points higher right now. That's cuts to the core of their portfolio.
While right now, those numbers seem to be going up slowly again. But if they continued to slip, there would come a point where the development costs, support, advertising, etc, would be greater than the gross sales from the product. Most companies cut and run before that. Look what happened with Premier. It almost happened with Elements 4. That was touch and go.
To Apple's credit if Adobe jumped ship what would happen is that everyone would update their software and likely see what would happen. I know people still, happily, using Photoshop 6 and Quark 4.
I think Apple would have 3 yrs to find a replacement or develop one. I'm not sure how losing Microsoft would affect Macs since Office is important but dual booting would allow you to at least run Office.
I envision a future where you run a plethora of applications on different OS and everything works together well with a little tweaking. The whole idea of a monolithic platform seems to be archaic and silly.
Apple wouldn't have three years. They would have to buy Adobe. They wouldn't want to do that, but I don't see them having any other chance.
Look at the uproar at Adobe not having CS3 Universal until April. could you imagine what would happen if Adobe said that they were discontinuing it?
This would also cause other big developers to do the same thing.
Apple's stock would drop like a stone. the company would be in a political mess. Companies would stop buying Mac's, and wait to see what would happen.
hmurchison, you are a senior member too and I have a question for you. Do you think with this strategy from Apple, it gives Microsoft every excuse now to drop all mac software. They already dropped IE and WMP for Mac, now they can drop Mac Office.
Before Microsoft made $475 from Mac Office, now they can drop all the development overhead for the Mac unit altogether and make $625 from Mac users. $150 for XP/Vista and another $475 for Windows Office. Wouldn't that move further imbed Microsoft into the Mac platform and make the Mac even more relient on MS? All they would have to do then is change a few lines of code and no more compatibility with BootCamp?
I know that Microsoft came out and stated another 5 years of mac software, but couldn't of that just been cover for this whole initiative? First, drop the lower end, non profit software (IE and WMP), keep the Mac Office till Boot Camp is fully baked, then back out of the Mac platform all together?
or
Do you think that Apple is betting the farm on Laptops. I, like a lot if Apple users in the business world have an Apple Desktop/or Laptop for personal use and Dell Laptop furnished by work. With the ability to run Windows OS natively, it would allow me to ultimately drop the Work laptop and just carry the Mac Laptop because it can do both.
How do you see iWork playing into all this, if anywhere?
I would really like to hear your thoughts on this?
One reason I don't see this as a significant threat to development for MacOS is that this is arguably a tool for enthusiasts only. No matter how nice of a job Apple has done with their "Boot Camp" utility, Joe Blow is not going to buy a Mac and then install Windows on it; Joe Blow likely does not know how to install Windows in the first place.
Speaking for myself, I'm a PC user that has not yet "switched" to Mac, and I've been seriously considering doing so for a year or two. My problem is that there are some key pieces of software that I use that are only available for Windows. This dual-boot solution means that I could now viably purchase a Mac, booting to Windows if/when necessary (multi-tasking isn't an issue).
Bikertwin, I don't remember, with all of this posting, whether it was in this thread or the other one about Boot Camp, but you asked about XP SP 2 being required to install. The answer is yes.
Also, in response to the question which someone else, I think, asked about NTFS and FAT.
My answer earlier wasn't correct. You CAN create an NTFS partition, but the MAC OS can't read from it if you need to go and get a file from a folder while in OS X.
Here is the Apple page with the FAQ's in case they haven't been seen yet. Scroll down a bit on the page, and click on the blue links.
My answer earlier wasn't correct. You CAN create an NTFS partition, but the MAC OS can't read from it if you need to go and get a file from a folder while in OS X.
Uh, I have another error for you.
MacOS X can *READ* NTFS, but can't *WRITE* to it.
So data can be moved from Windows to Mac, but not (easily) the other way around.
Like I said, this is a migration assist tool.
From the page you linked to:
Quote:
My Windows XP volume appears on the desktop when I'm started up in Mac OS X, but I can't rename it or copy files to it.
If the Windows volume was formatted using NTFS, Mac OS X can read it but not write files to it or rename it.
One reason I don't see this as a significant threat to development for MacOS is that this is arguably a tool for enthusiasts only. No matter how nice of a job Apple has done with their "Boot Camp" utility, Joe Blow is not going to buy a Mac and then install Windows on it; Joe Blow likely does not know how to install Windows in the first place.
Speaking for myself, I'm a PC user that has not yet "switched" to Mac, and I've been seriously considering doing so for a year or two. My problem is that there are some key pieces of software that I use that are only available for Windows. This dual-boot solution means that I could now viably purchase a Mac, booting to Windows if/when necessary (multi-tasking isn't an issue).
The key Windows software I use for work are Access, Microsoft Project and Visio. I can probably get away with Omni instead of visio, but the other two will be harder to find a decent replacement.
So data can be moved from Windows to Mac, but not (easily) the other way around.
Like I said, this is a migration assist tool.
From the page you linked to:
Yes, I know that. I did post the FAQ after all. I wouldn't have posted it if I hadn't read it first. I should have said if you need to work on a file from...
Users would leave to follow the software. When you are a company, or a pro, the cost of switching is minor.
To not see this is being wishful.
I recently spoke to a guy who has owned a post house for over 10 years. He uses Avid on Macs. I asked about the late 90's and if he considered switching to Windows from Mac.
He said no he never considered it at all. He told me most of the post houses that ran Avid on Windows were new start ups. Most all the old post houses that used Avid on Mac did not switch.
In fact when Avid was ported to Windows the Mac community was afraid Avid would dump development for the Mac. The Mac community openly and loudly complained to Avid about this fear.
Avid stated its dedication and continued support of the Mac even when Apple was spiraling down the drain.
Comments
Originally posted by Kickaha
Yes, Windows will ruin your computing experience just as fast as on a Dell.
Yes, Windows will run at 'full speed'. It will depend on the optimization of the GPU drivers, etc, but it appears from what little benchmarking I've seen that it isn't bad for the hardware being used.
Fer instance: http://service.futuremark.com/compare?c=880378_1
Note the CPU marks on the iMac are *better* than the 3GHz PentiumD gaming rig. Wacky, huh?
The GPU marks are lower, but I'll leave it to someone else to interpret that.
Dang! I should have seen your post first.
Originally posted by backtomac
I don't disagree but with apps that are critical to the viability of the platform it looks to me like Apple is willing to do the developement. Unlike MS I bet Apple would tolerate competition. But with boot camp they can't tolerate an adobe saying " we recognize that apple users can now boot into windows therfore we are going to concentrate all our efforts on win cs". Surely if we have discussed this senario here on these forums, it's been discuused at Apple. They surely have a contingency plan.
It's been discussed for years and years. I'm sure they discuss it at Apple on a periodic basis.
For those who dismiss it, and I'm not saying that you are, no developer would ever leave the Mac platform because of it.
That's wrong. We've seen developers leave the platform even without it!
The best hope here, and I'm sure that Apple is seeing it the same way, is that the growth of the platform will give impetus to developers to stay, and even have new ones join in. If Windows gives Apple a good number of new customers, and most of those who buy a Mac with the eventual idea of installing Windows, never do, then this will be good.
But Apple can't become a one stop shop all alone, with few other developers in competition. No matter how good Apple's programs can be, there will always be people who prefer working another way. If there is only one way on the Mac platform, then Apple will find that there is a limited base of customers to pull from.
Just like there are people who love InDesign, and hate Quark, there are those who love Quark, but hate Indesign. If one of those left the Mac platform, there would be many people who would go to Windows, because their favorite program was only to be found there.
Remember that computer platforms are only as good as the software running on them.
But, it's also better to have five programs that are pretty good, on a platform, than just one that's really good.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Okay, this all kind of hinges on a single point though...
Name the Mac developers that can tell their users "Oh well, we've decided to drop Mac support - just spend an additional $100-200 and then you can buy our Windows version on top of that...", and have them snap to and do it. I can't think of one. It'd be marketshare suicide for the app.
Heck, users bitch whine and moan about *regular* upgrade pricing - you think they're going to blow the money on a Windows license just to run an app?
Like I said, it'd take every developer in an entire market segment ditching simultaneously to actually cause a problem, and I just don't see that happening. For every Adobe that might ditch, there are a couple other developers waiting in the wings, salivating at grabbing some of that marketshare.
Adobe for one. MS for two. There are plenty of others who have done so over the years. Most of the CAD industry. Financial, and others.
Many developers who have gone from being Mac shops over the years, to being Mac/PC shops have found most of their customers on Windows after a while. It's natural. There are twenty times as many people using Windows as Macs. Even if a much smaller percentage use the program, that is still more people.
Do you really think that if Adobe left the platform the industry would look for something else? No way. Same thing with Quark.
Smaller, more basic programs can always be remade by some other developer, but not the big complex ones that have been around for some time, and have industries built around them.
Users would leave to follow the software. When you are a company, or a pro, the cost of switching is minor.
To not see this is being wishful.
Originally posted by melgross
It's been discussed for years and years. I'm sure they discuss it at Apple on a periodic basis.
For those who dismiss it, and I'm not saying that you are, no developer would ever leave the Mac platform because of it.
That's wrong. We've seen developers leave the platform even without it!
While I don't disagree with your reasoning per se, I think it's important to point out (if it already hasn't been) that in fiscal 2005, 25% of Adobe revenue came from the Mac platform... And that's primarily with CS and Acrobat, etc. on the Mac, whereas the Windows sales include products like Creative Solutions' business software and other products. While Adobe in the long term may be a wild card, at least for now Adobe gets quite a chunk of change for developing Mac software... and I don't think that's going to change anytime soon.
I think Apple would have 3 yrs to find a replacement or develop one. I'm not sure how losing Microsoft would affect Macs since Office is important but dual booting would allow you to at least run Office.
I envision a future where you run a plethora of applications on different OS and everything works together well with a little tweaking. The whole idea of a monolithic platform seems to be archaic and silly.
Originally posted by Mr. Dirk
While I don't disagree with your reasoning per se, I think it's important to point out (if it already hasn't been) that in fiscal 2005, 25% of Adobe revenue came from the Mac platform... And that's primarily with CS and Acrobat, etc. on the Mac, whereas the Windows sales include products like Creative Solutions' business software and other products. While Adobe in the long term may be a wild card, at least for now Adobe gets quite a chunk of change for developing Mac software... and I don't think that's going to change anytime soon.
Yes, but Adobe has stated, publically, in interviews, and in their financial statement, that Apple users comprise 27% of CS2 users. That's a couple of points higher right now. That's cuts to the core of their portfolio.
While right now, those numbers seem to be going up slowly again. But if they continued to slip, there would come a point where the development costs, support, advertising, etc, would be greater than the gross sales from the product. Most companies cut and run before that. Look what happened with Premier. It almost happened with Elements 4. That was touch and go.
Originally posted by hmurchison
To Apple's credit if Adobe jumped ship what would happen is that everyone would update their software and likely see what would happen. I know people still, happily, using Photoshop 6 and Quark 4.
I think Apple would have 3 yrs to find a replacement or develop one. I'm not sure how losing Microsoft would affect Macs since Office is important but dual booting would allow you to at least run Office.
I envision a future where you run a plethora of applications on different OS and everything works together well with a little tweaking. The whole idea of a monolithic platform seems to be archaic and silly.
Apple wouldn't have three years. They would have to buy Adobe. They wouldn't want to do that, but I don't see them having any other chance.
Look at the uproar at Adobe not having CS3 Universal until April. could you imagine what would happen if Adobe said that they were discontinuing it?
This would also cause other big developers to do the same thing.
Apple's stock would drop like a stone. the company would be in a political mess. Companies would stop buying Mac's, and wait to see what would happen.
This wouldn't be a burp, this would be a volcano.
I need to go take a shower and clean off this dirty feeling I have right now.
Originally posted by dstranathan
I'm replying to this post from Windows XP SP2 (running on my Mac mini). This is just plain WEIRD.
I need to go take a shower and clean off this dirty feeling I have right now.
You cheating slut!
Windows is pretty responsive. I'm quite impressed so far but have only used it for about 30 minutes.
Originally posted by hmurchison
You cheating slut!
hmurchison, you are a senior member too and I have a question for you. Do you think with this strategy from Apple, it gives Microsoft every excuse now to drop all mac software. They already dropped IE and WMP for Mac, now they can drop Mac Office.
Before Microsoft made $475 from Mac Office, now they can drop all the development overhead for the Mac unit altogether and make $625 from Mac users. $150 for XP/Vista and another $475 for Windows Office. Wouldn't that move further imbed Microsoft into the Mac platform and make the Mac even more relient on MS? All they would have to do then is change a few lines of code and no more compatibility with BootCamp?
I know that Microsoft came out and stated another 5 years of mac software, but couldn't of that just been cover for this whole initiative? First, drop the lower end, non profit software (IE and WMP), keep the Mac Office till Boot Camp is fully baked, then back out of the Mac platform all together?
or
Do you think that Apple is betting the farm on Laptops. I, like a lot if Apple users in the business world have an Apple Desktop/or Laptop for personal use and Dell Laptop furnished by work. With the ability to run Windows OS natively, it would allow me to ultimately drop the Work laptop and just carry the Mac Laptop because it can do both.
How do you see iWork playing into all this, if anywhere?
I would really like to hear your thoughts on this?
Speaking for myself, I'm a PC user that has not yet "switched" to Mac, and I've been seriously considering doing so for a year or two. My problem is that there are some key pieces of software that I use that are only available for Windows. This dual-boot solution means that I could now viably purchase a Mac, booting to Windows if/when necessary (multi-tasking isn't an issue).
Also, in response to the question which someone else, I think, asked about NTFS and FAT.
My answer earlier wasn't correct. You CAN create an NTFS partition, but the MAC OS can't read from it if you need to go and get a file from a folder while in OS X.
Here is the Apple page with the FAQ's in case they haven't been seen yet. Scroll down a bit on the page, and click on the blue links.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303572
I'm cross posting this in the other thread. I know we're not supposed to do that, but in this case I think it's important.
EDIT: spelling errors that neither my checker nor I caught. grr!
Originally posted by melgross
My answer earlier wasn't correct. You CAN create an NTFS partition, but the MAC OS can't read from it if you need to go and get a file from a folder while in OS X.
Uh, I have another error for you.
MacOS X can *READ* NTFS, but can't *WRITE* to it.
So data can be moved from Windows to Mac, but not (easily) the other way around.
Like I said, this is a migration assist tool.
From the page you linked to:
My Windows XP volume appears on the desktop when I'm started up in Mac OS X, but I can't rename it or copy files to it.
If the Windows volume was formatted using NTFS, Mac OS X can read it but not write files to it or rename it.
Originally posted by Chagi
One reason I don't see this as a significant threat to development for MacOS is that this is arguably a tool for enthusiasts only. No matter how nice of a job Apple has done with their "Boot Camp" utility, Joe Blow is not going to buy a Mac and then install Windows on it; Joe Blow likely does not know how to install Windows in the first place.
Speaking for myself, I'm a PC user that has not yet "switched" to Mac, and I've been seriously considering doing so for a year or two. My problem is that there are some key pieces of software that I use that are only available for Windows. This dual-boot solution means that I could now viably purchase a Mac, booting to Windows if/when necessary (multi-tasking isn't an issue).
The key Windows software I use for work are Access, Microsoft Project and Visio. I can probably get away with Omni instead of visio, but the other two will be harder to find a decent replacement.
Originally posted by audiopollution
Steve needs a couple of reasons for you to buy Leopard.
I'm sure someone will sort it out soon, though.
Don't forget it IS still a Beta version, so some things still won't work.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Uh, I have another error for you.
MacOS X can *READ* NTFS, but can't *WRITE* to it.
So data can be moved from Windows to Mac, but not (easily) the other way around.
Like I said, this is a migration assist tool.
From the page you linked to:
Yes, I know that. I did post the FAQ after all. I wouldn't have posted it if I hadn't read it first. I should have said if you need to work on a file from...
Originally posted by mynamehere
Don't forget it IS still a Beta version, so some things still won't work.
and it looks to remain a beta as well. This won't be a seperate product. It expires soon after Leopard is expected to be released.
Though, they could fix some things.
Users would leave to follow the software. When you are a company, or a pro, the cost of switching is minor.
To not see this is being wishful.
I recently spoke to a guy who has owned a post house for over 10 years. He uses Avid on Macs. I asked about the late 90's and if he considered switching to Windows from Mac.
He said no he never considered it at all. He told me most of the post houses that ran Avid on Windows were new start ups. Most all the old post houses that used Avid on Mac did not switch.
In fact when Avid was ported to Windows the Mac community was afraid Avid would dump development for the Mac. The Mac community openly and loudly complained to Avid about this fear.
Avid stated its dedication and continued support of the Mac even when Apple was spiraling down the drain.